Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2007  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/campbellismexamiOOjeteiala 


CAMPBELLISM    EXAMINED. 


By 

JEREMIAH    B.    JETEB 

or   «ICHMOKD,   VIWIKIA. 


NEW-YORK : 

SHELDON,  BLAKKMAX    &   CO. 

OBICAGO  :  S.  C.  GBICGS  *  CO. — CHiRLESTON  :  SMITH  k   WHII.DEH. 

NAsnviLLn  :  toon,  nelson  *  CO.,  and  graves,  marks  t  CO.  . 

ClNCISNAn  :   APPLEGATE  *  CO. — RICHMOND  : 
CHARLES   WORTHAM. 

1858. 


Sntered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1854,  by 

JEREMIAH  B.   JETER, 

In  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  United  States  for  the  Sonlhcn 
District  of  New  York. 


J^l 


J.  J.  Rbbd, 

Prister  &  Stereotvpbb, 

18  Bpi-uco-St.,  N.  Y. 


TO  THE 
ESTEEMED    BRETHREN. 

4T   WHOSE   REQUEST,   THIS   WORK   HAS   BEEN  J'REPARED, 

IT   IS   REBPECTFULLT   INSCRIBED   BY 

THE    AUTHOR, 

WITH    HIS    EARNEST    PRAYER    TO    THE 

"FATHER    OF    LIGHTS," 

THAT   IT    MAY   PROMOTE   THE   CAUSE    OF    TRUTH    AND    PIKTY. 


CONTENTS 


I     The  Inteoduction, 


n.  Campbellism  in  its  Inception,  .        .  13 

III.  Campbellism  in  its  Chaos,         ....      23 

rv.  Campbellism  in  its  Fokjl4.tion,  .        .  .          76 

V.  Campbellism  in  its  Principles,  .  .        .114 

VJ.  Campbellism  in  its  Discipline,  .  .        292 

VIL  Campbellism  in  its  Tkndencies,  .  .        .    338 

VTII.  Conclusion      .      ^^      , .        .  .       ,  354 


LIBRARY 

JJNrVERSIT\'  OF  rMJFpRNIA 

^ANTA  BARBARA 


"REV    DR.   J.  R.   JETER, 

DiAR  Sir: — 

Thk  undersigned  ministers  and  members  of 
Baptist  churches,  have  been  deeply  impressed  with  the  impor- 
tance to  our  churches  of  a  succinct  and  popular  treatise  upon 
the  rise,  progress,  character,  and  influence  of  the  sect  of  Chris- 
tians called  Disciples,  or  Campbellites.  The  knowledge  which 
your  position  has  given  you  of  this  subject,  and  the  clearness 
of  thought,  justness  of  view,  candor  of  spirit,  which  have 
marked  the  passage  on  this  subject  contained  in  your  memoir 
of  the  late  Rev.  Andrew  Broaddus,  have  mduced  us  respectfully 
to  request  that  you  will  at  your  earliest  convenience  prepare  a 
work  of  the  character  above  described. 

-The  undersigned  believe  that  by  complying  with  this  re- 
quest, you  will  do  an  essential  service  to  the  cause  of  truth, 
and  advance  the  glory  of  our  Holy  Redeemer. 

Elisha  Tccker,*  Edward  Latiirop, 

M.  B.  Anderson,  Geo.  "W.  Samson, 

IlEafAN  Lincoln,  J,  M.  Linnard, 

0.  "W".  Houghton,  •  A.  D.  Gillette, 
S.  S.  Cutting,  J.  C.  Stockbridce, 

"W.  B.  Jacobs,  S.  F.  Smith." 

*  Since  the  above  leqnost  was  signed,  in  May,  1852,  Doctor  Tucker,  of 
Chicago,  Illinois,  has  been  called  from  his  labors  to  his  reward.  I  knew, 
loved,  and  vcner.i^pil  him      Ho  was  a  noble  specimen  of  a  Christian  va>  ii»-, 


VI  MEMOniAL. 

ter.  With  enlarged  vieirs,  ripe  experience,  sotmd  judgment,  and  a  oonser- 
vatiTe  spirit,  he  was  eminently  fitted  to  be,  as  he  was,  a  leader  in  "  the  sac- 
ramental host  of  God'a  elect."  By  his  expansive  and  generous  sympathies, 
he  was  allied  to  men  of  all  parties,  and  all  sections ;  but  by  his  devotion  to 
truth,  ho  was  identified  with  the  advocates  of  evangelic  Christianity.  His 
life  wa^  a  beautiful  commentary  on  the  doctrine  which  he  embraced,  and 
his  death  a  happy  termination  of  a  life  of  toil  and  usefulness.  I  need  not 
Bay  more  of  this  excellent  servant  of  Christ,  and  less  in  justice  to  my  feel- 
ings, I  could  not  say.  J .  B  J. 


INTRODUCTION 


The  term  Carnphellism  is  used  in  this  treatise, 
not  as  a  term  of  reproach,  but  of  distinction.  No 
other  word  denotes  the  system  which  it  is  proposed 
to  examine.  Mr.  Alexander  Campbell,  of  Bethany, 
Virginia,  and  the  party  embracing  his  views,  hare 
assumed  several  appellations.  They  have  styled 
themselves  "  Be/orTners"  "  Christians,"  and  "  Dis- 
ciples*' Without  discussing  their  exclusive  claim 
to  these  titles,  it  is  clear  that  from  neither  of  them 
can  any  term  be  derived  which  will  fairly  distinguish 
their  system  of  doctrine.  The  word  Reformation 
has  been  appropriated,  by  common  consent,  to  de- 
note that  great  moral  revolution,  of  which  Luther 
and  Calvin  were  the  prime  agents.  The  term 
Christianity  can  never  be  wrested  from  its  univer- 


Vm  INTRODUCTION. 

♦  * 

sally  established  import,  to  express  the  views  of  any 
sect  or  jiarty,  however  good,  wise  or  great.  From 
the  word  Disciple,  indefinite  as  an  appellative,  no 
tfijm  can  be  derived  to  signify  the  views  of  those  who 
adopt  the  name.  Mr.  Campbell  claims  to  have  dis- 
covered the  "  Ancient  Gospel."  Without  at  this 
time  conceding  or  denying  the  equity  of  his  claim, 
it  may  be  observed  that  the  inquiries  now  to  be  made 
have  reference  not  to  the  Ancient  Gospel,  recorded 
in  the  writings  of  the  evangelists  and  apostles,  but 
to  the  speculations  of  Mr.  Campbell,  contained  in 
his  voluminous  works,  concerning  this  gospel,  and 
which  have  been  received  as  true  by  the  friends  of 
the  "  Current  Ueformation."  To  call  these  specu- 
lations the  Ancient  Gospel,  would  be  a  manifest  mis- 
nomer. I  am  then  under  the  necessity  of  employ- 
ing some  indefinite  term,  a  tedious  circumlocution, 
or  the  word  Camphellism  to  denote  the  system  under 
discussion,  and  the  last  course  seems  preferable. 

This  system  is  with  great  propriety  termed  Gamp- 
hellism.  Systems  of  philosophy,  science,  and  reli- 
gion, have  usually  been  designated  after  their  dis- 
'coverers,  first  promulgators,  or  most  distinguished 
advocates,  Mr.  Campbell  is  the  author,  and  most 
eminent  proclairaer  of  the  peculia,r  doctrines,  which, 


INTRdDUCTION/  VS. 

within  the  last  thirty  years,  have  spread  in  the 
Southern  and  Western  states,  under  the  title  of 
"  The  Beformation"  No  other  man  has  added  an 
article  to  the  system,  subtracted  one  from  it,  or  ma- 
terially modified  it.  Many  truths  are  taught  by 
Mr.  Campbell  in  common  with  other  Christians  ; 
very  few  of  the  principles  for  which  he  pleads  are 
strictly  new  ;  ^ut  having  revived,  modified,  and 
placed  in  new  combinations  some  antiquated  senti- 
ments, and  added  to  them  a  few  original  specula- 

'  ^wons,  he  is  fairly  entitled  to  all  the  honor,  and 
obnoxious  to  all  the  censure  which  his  system 
merits. 

It  is  not  my  purpose  to  write  a  history  of  Camp- 

V'  ^bellism.  I  have  neither  the  inclination,  time,  nor 
means  to  do  it.  Nor  do  I  design  to  confine  myself 
to  a  polemic  discussion.  Oampbellism,  like  other 
things  earthly,  has  passed  through  various  and  im- 
portant changes.  To  arrive  at  just  views  of  it,  wo 
must  carefully  notice  its  rise,  progress,  modifica- 
tions, and  influence,  as  well  as  its  distinctive  princi- 
ples. It  must  be  viewed  from  different  stand- 
points, and  under  different  phases,  that  its  true 
character  may  be  understood.  My  purpose  is  to 
furnish  a  i^ithful  delineation  of  the  system — its  prin- 


X  INTRODUCTION. 

ciples,  spirit  and  influence — to  censure  he  evil,  and 
commend  the  good.  vj 

Various  considerations  have  prevailed  with  me  to 
undertake  this  work.  The  subject  to  be  examined 
is  important.  It  were  vain  to  deny  that  Campbell- 
ism  has  exercised  an  extensive  influence  on  the  reli- 
gious sentiment  of  the  country.  We  are  interested 
not  less  as  philosophers  than  as  Christians  to  in- 
quire into  the  causes  of  this  success.  The  proposed 
treatise  is  demanded  by  public  curiosity.  What  is 
Oampbellism  ?  This  question,  asked  by  many,  is 
not  easily  answered.  Some  perceive  no  distinction 
between  it  and  the  views  generally  entertained  by 
the  Baptists ;  and  others  consider  it  a  dangerous 
system  of  error.  A  calm,  discriminating  and  faith- 
ful examination  of  it,  cannot  fail  to  profit  both  those 
who  embrace,  and  those  who  reject  it.  All  these 
considerations  would  probably*  have  failed  to  induce 
me  to  undertake  the  work,  had  not  brethren,  whose 
judgment  is  worthy  of  respect,  and  with  whose  re- 
quest it  is  a  pleasure  to  comply,  urged  me  to  en- 
gage in  it. 

Of  my  fitness  for  the  task  the  reader  will  judgo 
by  the  manner  of  its  execution.  I  have  enjoyed 
very  fair  opportrnities  of  forming  correct  opinions 


INTRODUCTION.  XI 

of  Mr.  Campbell's  system.  I  first  saw  him  in  the 
"'^year  1825.  Since  that  time  I  have  been  a  careful  '^ 
observer  of  his  course.  I  have  watched  the  gradual 
development  of  his  principles,  and  marked  their  in- 
fluence on  the  churches.  I  have  read  most  that  has 
been  published  by  him  and  his  opponents  on  the  va- 
rious points  in  debate.  I  have  conversed  much  with 
persons  embracing  and  zealously  supporting  the  Ee- 
formation. 

It  is  my  purpose  to  conduct  this  investigation  in 
the  spirit  of  candor  and  fairness,  knowing  that  noth- 
ing can  be  gained  to  the  cause  of  truth  and  right- 
eousness by  sophistry,  misfepresentation  and  detrac- 
tion. No  sentence  incompatible  with  the  claims  of 
justice,  and  christian  courtesy  shiU  intentionally 
escape  my  pen  ;  nor  shall  I  withhold  a  frank  and 
faithful  expression  of  my  opinions  on  aU  points  which 
I  deem  important.    * 

I  do  not  hope  to  be  able  to  meet  the  expectation, 
and  satisfy  the  wishes  of  all  my  readers.  Some  will 
think  me  too  lenient,  and  others  too  severe — some 
will  think  that  I  concede  too  much,  and  others  too 
little.  Truth  generally  lies  between,  extremes.  I 
ftm  more  anxious,  I  tnist,  to  please  God  than  men 
—to  piomotc  the  cause  of  truth  than  to  gain  a  ric- 


xii  INTRODUCTION. 

tory.  Writing  for  no  sect  or  party,  but  for  all  who 
desire  to  know  the  truth,  I  ask  nothing  of  my  read- 
ers, except  an  unprejudiced  consideration  of  the 
facts  and  arguments  presented  in  the  work.  The 
interests  of  the  writer  and  reader  are  identical ;  and 
the  same  law  which  requires  him  to  publish,  re- 
quires them  to  receive,  the  truth. 


^ 


■i* 


k  '      • 


4i 

* 


CAMPEELLISM  EIAMINED. 


CAMPBELLISM  IN   ITS  INCEPTION. 

Circumstances,  it  has  teen  frequently  affirmed, 
make  men.  The  remark  is  not  true  in  an  unquali- 
fied sense ;  but  it  cannot  be  questioned  that  cir- 
cumstances exert  a  mighty  influence  in  forming  the 
tastes,  opinions,  and  characters,  and  guiding  the 
lives  of  most  men.  Mr.  Campbell,  much  as  he  has 
boasted  of  his  independence  of  thought  and  con- 
duct, has  not  risen  above  this  common  law  of 
humanity.  He  is,  to  a  great  extent,  what  his 
peculiar  circumstances — ^his  early  training  and  asso- 
ciations, and  his  subsequent  relations,  avocations, 
and  conflicts — have  made  him.  He  bears,  most 
clearly,  the  impress  of  the  mould  in  which  he  was 
cast.  He  was  educated  in  the  University  of  Glas- 
gow, in  Scotland.  If  he  was  not  brought  up  among 
the  Seceders — as  he  probably  was — he  was  early 
connected  with  that  mogt  rigid  of  all  the  Presby- 
terian sects,  adopted  their  views,  and  fully  imbibed 


14  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS  INCEPTION. 

their  spirit.  "  I  have,"  said  he,  "  tried  the  phari- 
saic  plan,  and  the  monastic.  I  was  once  so  straight, 
that,  like  the  Indian's  tree,  I  leaned  a  little  the 
other  way.  And  however  much  I  may  be  slandered 
now  as  seeking  '  popularity,'  or  a  popular  course,  I 
have  to  rejoice  to  my  own  satisfaction,  as  well  as 
to  others,  I  proved  that  truth,  and  not  popularity 
was  my  object ;  for  I  was  once  so  strict  a  Separatist 
that  I  would  neither  pray  nor  sing  praises  with  any 
one  who  was  not  as  perfect  as  I  supposed  myself." 
Chn.  Bap.,  p.  238.  Had  Mr.  C.  not  passed  his 
early  years  in  Scotland,  his  religious  views  and 
career  would  have  differed  widely  from  what  they 
have  been.  Many  of  his  speculations  have  been 
Scottish  importations.  To  which  of  the  Seceder 
sects  he  was  attached,  does  not  appear,  but  it  is 
presumed  from  his  early  phariseeism,  to  the  strait- 
est.  It  would  be  strange,  if  his  education  in  the 
school  of  ])igotry  and  intolerance,  had  not  given 
complexion  to  his  spirit,  character  to  his  opinions, 
and  direction  to  his  labors,  in  after  life. 

In  August,  1809,  this  young  Seceder,  with  a  cer- 
tificate of  church  membership  in  his  pocket,  set 
sail  from  the  city  of  Greenock,  in  Scotland,  for  the 
United  States,  and,  after  a  narrow  escape  from  ship- 
wreck, landed  safely  in  the  city  of  New  York,  in 
the  ensuing  September.  He  brought  with  him  the 
Reformation  in  embryo.  Before  he  left  the  father- 
land, his  faith  "  in  creeds  and  confessions  of  human 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   INCEPTION.  15 

device"  was  considerably  shaken.  Whether  the 
iron  rigor  of  his  creed,  by  which  he  had  been  fet- 
tered, had  any  influence  in  unsettling  his  faith  does 
not  appear.  From  New  York,  he  immediately  re- 
paired to  Washington,  Penn.,  and  commenced  his 
American  career,  with  what  he  proclaimed  as  an 
important  discovery,  "  that  nothing  not  as  old  as 
the  New  Testament  should  be  made  an  article  of 
faith,  a  rule  of  practice,  or  a  term  of  communion 
among  Christians."  This  truth  was  the  "  pole- 
star"  to  guide  him  in  all  subsequent  researches  and  - 
labors.  W^e  cannot  but  congratulate  him  on  his 
discovery,  while  we  confess  our  surprise  that  he 
should  have  been  so  long  in  making  it.  It  was  the 
doctrine — the  main  pillar  of  the  great  reformation 
led  on  by  Luther,  Calvin,  and  other  worthies,  in  the 
sixteenth  century.  It  had  never  been  called  in 
question  by  any  respectable  Protestant  sect,  or  even 
writer.  The  most  jealous  advocates  of  human 
creeds  ascribed  to  them  no  authority,  except  what 
they  derived  from  the  Scriptures.  They  might,  by 
a  misinterpretation  of  the  Scriptures,  put  unsorip- 
tural  articles  into  their  creeds,  or  they  might 
pervert  the  Scriptures  to  make  them  harmonize 
with  their  inherited  creeds  ;  but  not  a  creed-monger 
could  be  found  who  maintained,  or  even  dreamed, 
that  any  thing  "  not  as  old  as  the  New  Testament 
should  be  made  an  article  of  faith." 

Guided  by  this  "  p<^-star,"  "Mr.  C.  soon  began 


"16'       *      CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   INCEPTION. 

to  make  progress  in  religious  knowledge.  His 
"  pole-star"  proved  to  be  "  the  morning  star  of  the 
reformation."  In  July,  1810,  he  publicly  avowed 
his  "  convictions  of  the  independency  of  the  church 
of  Christ,  and  the  excellency  and  authority  of  the 
Scriptures."  He  now  commenced  a  series  of  desul- 
tory, itinerating  labor — "  pronouncing,"  to  use  his 
own  style',  "  orations  on  the  primary  topics  of  the 
Christian  religion,"  in  "Western  Pennsylvania,  and 
the  contiguous  parts  of  Virginia  and  Ohio.  In 
1811,  he  married,  and  became  a  resident,  and,  as 
soon  as  the  laws  would  permit,  a  citizen  of  Virginia, 
About  this  time,  he  was  led  to  question  the  divine 
authority  of  infant  sprinkling ;  and,  after  a  long, 
serious,  and  prayerful  examination  of  all  the  sources 
of  information  within  his  reach,  to  reject  it,  and  to 
solicit  immersion  on  a  profession  of  faith.  He  was 
baptized  by  Elder  Matthias  Luse,  in  the  presence  of 
Elder  Henry  Spears,  in  June,  1812,  an3.  soon  after 
was  ordained  one  of  the  Elders  of  the  church  at 
Brush  Kun.  He  did  not,  at  first,  design  to  connect 
himself  with  the  Baptist  denomination,  but  forming 
a  better  acquaintance  with  some  of  the  members  of 
the  Bedstone  Baptist  Association,  composed  of 
churches  partly  in  Pennsylvania,  and  partly  in  Vir 
ginia,  he  induced  the  church  with  which  he  was 
connected,  to  sue  for  admission  into  that  body,  and 
presenting  a  written  declaration  of  their  faith,  they 
were  received  in  the  iaV  of  1813.     From  tliis  period. 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS   IXCEPTION.  17 

until  1823,  Mr.  C.  continued  bis  labors  as  a  Cbristian 
teacber, 'in  Nortb-Western  Virginia,  witbout  any 
very  important  results.  But  bis  mind  was  far  from 
being  stationary.  Ligbt  dawned  on  it  apace.  Ho 
was  preparing,  eitber  witb  or  witbout  design,  to 
become  the  advocate  of  wbat  be  deemed  a  great 
reformation,  and  tbe  Cqrypbeus  of  a  large  party. 
Cbn.  Bap.,  p.  92. 

Mr.  Campbell,  baving  burst  tbe  bonds  imposed 
on  bim  by  bis  early  creed,  pursued  bis  religious  in- 
vestigations, witbout  restraint,  except  sucb  as  was 
laid  on  bim  by  natural  temperament,  early  im- 
pressions, and  mental  capacity.  He  bad  now  ceased 
to  be  a  pharisee.  He  could  sing  and  pray  witb  bis 
fellow-Cbristians.  But  mingUng  witb  tbem,  be 
soon  began  to  speculate  on  tbeir  manifold  errors. 
His  penetrating  eye  perceived,  or  be  tbougbt  tbat 
it  perceived,  and  be  did  not  lack  moral  courage  to  ^ 
proclaim,  tbat  "  tbe  present  popular  exbibition  of  . 
tbe  Cbristian  religion  is  a,  compound  of  Judaism, 
beatben  pbilosopby,  and  Cbristianity."  Cbn.  Bap., 
p.  9.  .  Tbe  pbrase  "  popular  exbibition  of  tbe  Chris- 
tian religion"  is  somewhat  equivocal ;  and  yet  there 
can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  as  to  tbe  sense  in  wyiijh 
he  uses  it.  It  could  be  nothing  to  his  purpose  to 
affirm  that  tbe  exhibitions  of  Christianity  made  by 
Romanists,  German  Rationalists,  or  the  advocates 
of  baptismal  regeneration,  are  sucb  a  compound. 
Anong  these   classes  of  refigiojiists  he  was  not 


Si,.         18  ,CAMPB£LLISM    IN   ITS   INCEPTION. 

labpring.  He,  doubtless,  referred  to  the  exhibition 
of  Christianity  usually  made  by  the  prevailing  re- 
ligious denominations  of  the  country.  These  dif- 
ferent Christian  persuasions,  mostly  maintaining, 
along  with  some  errors,  almost  inseparable  from 
human  imperfection,  the  vital,  soul-saving  truths 
of  the  Grospel,  were  in  his  estimation,  exhibitors  of 
a  compound  of  "  Judaism,  heathen  philosophy  and 
Christianity." 

That  there  may  be  no  mistake  on  this  subject, 
another  quotation  from  the  pen  of  Mr.  C.  will  be 
furnished. 

"  If  Christians  were,  and  may  be  the  happiest 
people  that  ever  lived,  it  is  because  they  live  under 
the  most  gracious  institution  ever  bestowed  on  men.. 
The  meaning  of  this  institution  has  been,  buried 
under  the  rubbish  of  human  traditions  for  hundreds 
.  of  years.  It  was  lost  in  the  dark  ages,  and  has 
never  been,  till  recently,  disinterred.  Various  efforts 
have  been  made,  and  considerable  progress  attended 
them  ;  but  since  the  Grand  Apostacy  was  com- 
pleted, till  the, present  generation,  the  Gospel  of 
Jesus  Christ  has  not  been  laid  open  to  mankind  in 
1^  its  original  plainness,  simplicity  and  majesty.  A 
veil  in  reading  the  New  Institution  has  been  on  the 
hearts  of  Christians,"  &c.     Chn.  Sys.,  p.  180. 

With  the  truth  or  falsehood  of  these  opinions,  we 
have,  at  present,  no  concern.  It  is,  however,  de- 
sirable to  take  an  accurate  observation  of  Mr.  Camp- 


CAMPBELUSM  IN  ITS   INCEPTION.  19 

bell's  position.  The  above  language  defines,  quite 
unambiguously,  bis  own  conceptions  of  tbe  ground 
which  he  occupied.  The  Christian  institution — the 
Gospel  of  salvation — had  been  buried,  under  a  mass 
of  traditions,  for  ages.  Various  efforts  had  been 
made,  at  different  times,  by  men  of  great  reputation 
for  learning,  piety,  zeal,  and  fidelity,  to  remove  the 
superincumbent  mass,  with  small  success.  Then 
the  Reformer  of  Bethany  arose,  dug  away  the  rub- 
bish, and  exposed,  in  the  light  of  day,  the  long  lost 
Gospel,  in  all  its  beauty,  simplicity  and  majesty. 
These  are,  certainly,  high  pretensions.  They  may 
be  just,  and  if  so,  we  should  know  it,  that  we  may 
render  homage  to  our  benefactor.  We  propose  in 
the  progress  of  this  work,  to  make  strict  inquiries 
concerning  the  justice  of  these  claims. 

Mr.  C.  was  now  prepared  to  enter  earnestly  on 
the  prosecution  of  his  mission.  Having  analyzed 
the  "  popular  exhibition  of  the  Christian  religion,* 
and  pointed  out  its  primary  elements,  and  having 
made  considerable  progress  in  disinterring  the 
*'  ancient  Gospel"  from  the  deep  grave  in  which 
for  centuries  it  had  lain,  he  was  naturally  desirous 
that  the  benefits  of  his  discoveries  and  labors 
should  not  be  confined  to  an'  obscure  comer  of 
Virginia.  The  candle  was  not  lighted  to  be  put 
under  a  bushel.  The  morning  star  of  the  new 
Reformation  nust  shed  its  effulgence  in  a  wider 
sphere.     That  ^le  might  have  a  channel  for  dissemi- 


20  CAMPBELLISM   IN  ITS   INCEPTION. 

Dating  his  newly  formed  opinions,  Mr.  0.  commenced 
publishing  a  small  monthly  pamphlet,  entitled  the 
Christian  Baptist.  The  first  No.  was  issued  from 
Buffalo,  afterwards  called  Bethany,  Brooke  County, 
Va.,  July  4th,  1823.  The  day  was  aptly  chosen 
for  the  commencement  of  the  enterprise.  Conse- 
crated to  the  celebration  of  American  Independence, 
it  was  thenceforth  to  be  distinguished  as  the  com- 
mencement of  a  struggle  for  the  liberation  of  the 
churches  from  priestly  domination.  The  publica- 
tion of  the  Christian  Baptist  marks  an  era  in  the 
history  of  Campbellisra.  ¥dt  seven  years  it  was  the 
repository  of  the  lucubrations  of  Mr.  C.  and  of  his 
numerous  correspondents,  who  rapidly  sprang  up 
through  the  country.  It  was  edited  with  ability. 
As  it  will  hereafter  be  necessary  to  examine  many  arti- 
cles in  this  work,  it  is  sufficient  now  merely  to  express 
the  opinion  that  it  contains  some  things  worthy  of 
commendation,  more  that  are  entitled  to  no  parti- 
cular notice,  and  a  great  mass  of  rubbish.  Mr.  C. 
has  boasted  much  of  the  independent,  generous,  and 
fearless  manner  in  w^hich  his  jDeriodicals  have  been 
conducted.  He  has  professed  to  publish  both  sides 
of^very  controversy.  It  maybe  remarked,  that  policy 
frequently  assumes  the  garb  of  liberality.  He  was 
a  skillful  and  popular  debater — handled  a  ready 
pen — was  desirous  to  gain  notoriety,  and  promote 
the  circulation  of  his  paper — and  controversy  was 
V'^he  pabulum  on  which  he  lived  and  thrived.     It  is 


CAMPBELLISM  IN   ITS  INCEPTION.  21 

easy  to  perceive  that  under  such  circumstances, 
sound  policy  as  well  as  liberality,  would  court  dis- 
cussion. Liberality  is  envinced,  not  by  an  eager- 
ness for  disputation,  but  by  a  candid,  fair,  and 
considerate  treatment  of  our  opponent.  Few  theo- 
logians were  qualified  to  enter  the  lists  with  a 
disputant  so  ready,  adroit  and  sarcastic  as  he  was, 
and  most  of  that  small  number,  feeling  but  little 
interest  in  his  labors  or  speculations,  deemed  it 
sound  policy,  if  not  liberality,  to  decline  gratifying 
his  penchant  for  debate. 

It  does  not  appear  to  have  been  the  purpose  of 
Mr.  C,  at  least  in  the  commencement  of  his  Eeforma- 
tion,  to  organize  a  new  sect.  That  his  labors  tended 
to  that  result  was  clear  to  every  discerning,  atten- 
tive, and  impartial  observer.  Sectarianism  was  the 
object  of  the  most  intense  aversion — an  aversion 
probably  heightened  by  the  remembrance  of  his 
previous  Seceder  intolerance.  His  favorite  project 
was  to  fuse  the  various  Christian  sects,  not,  it  would 
seem,  by  the  fire  of  love,  but  of  criticism  and  ridi- 
cule, and  from  the  melted  mass  mould,  in  what  he 
termed,  the  "  ancient  Gospel,"  a  new  and  glorious 
body.     Let  us  hear  him  on  this  point, 

"  I  have  no  i^ea  of  adding  to  the  catalogue  of  new 
sects.  This  game  has  been  played  too  long.  I  labor 
to  see  sectarianism  abolished,  and  all  Christians  of 
ever}'  name  united  upon  the  one  foundation  on 
wliich    the   Apostolic   Church   was   founded.      To 


22      ^  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS  INCEPTION. 

bring  Baptists  and  Paedo-baptists  to  this,  is  my 
supreme  end."     Clin.  Bap.,  p.  217. 

No  intelligent  Christian  can  object  to  the  end 
which  Mr.  C.  proposed  to  accomplish.  The  union 
of  all  true  Christians  on  the  Apostolic  foundation, 
is  an  object  most  devoutly  to  be  wished.  All  good 
men  pray  for  it.  But  we  must  carefully  inquire, 
whether  the  means  by  which  he  proposes  to  attain 
this  object,  are  Scriptural  and  efficacious.  We  are 
now  prepared  to  contemplate  Campbellism  under 


-% 


'  CAMPBELLISM   IN  ITS   CIIAOS. 

The  period  of  Campbellism  wliich  it  is  now  pro- 
posed to  examine,  extends  from  the  first  appear- 
ance of  the  Christian  Baptist  to  the  time  when  Mr. 
Campbell,  and  those  persons  who  adopted  his  pe- 
culiar views,  and  entered  into  his  spirit  and  aims, 
were  excluded  from  the  Baptist  denomination. 
This  period  may  with  equal  propriety  be  termed 
its  chaotic  or  its  belligerent  state.  Belligerent  it  cer- 
tainly was.  The  publication  of  the  Christian  Bap- 
tist was  an  open,  formal  declaration  of  war  against 
all  the  religious  sects  and  parties  in  the  country  ; 
and  most  fearlessly,  skillfully  and  furiously  was  it 
waged.  Criticism,  logic,  eloquence,  sarcasm,  ridi- 
cide,  and  especially  caricature  and  sophistry  were 
the  missiles  employed  in  this  warfare.  Kevelation, 
history,  and  fiction  were  laid  under  contribution  in 
the  conflict.  At  first,  Mr.  0.  stood  alone,  battling 
single  handed,  as  he  fancied,  against  the  disciplined 
Chosts  of  sectarianism  ;  but  soon  he  was  joined  by 
a  band  of  volunteers,  less  learned,  strategic,  and 
cautious,  but  by  no  means  less  valorous,  confident 


24  CAMPBELLISM  IN   ITS    CHAOS, 

and  aggressive,  than  himself.  Almost  all  who  came 
over  to  his  side  were  from  the  first  warriors,  of 
dauntless  spirit,  panoplied  from  head  to  foot.  So 
great  was  their  ardor,  and  so  fierce  their  onslaught, 
that,  for  a  time,  it  seemed  as  if  one  could  "  chase  a 
thousand,  and  two  put  ten  thousand  to  flight." 

This  was  no  less  the  chaotic  than  the  belligerent 
period  of  Camj)hellism.  It  would  have  puzzled  the 
most  carefnl,  discriminating  and  candid  reader  of 
the  Christian  Baptist  to  form  any  clear  conceptions 
of  Mr.  Campbell's  principles  or  aims.  He  eschewed 
all  the  common  and  well  defined  terms  of  theology. 
His  teaching  was  almost  entirely  negative.  He  wius 
neither  a  Unitarian  nor  a  Trinitarian,  neither  a 
Calvinist  nor  an  Arminian  ;  but  what  he  really  was, 
or  desired  to  be,  none  could  certainly  affirm.  It 
was  clear  that  he  rejected  "  the  popular  exhibition 
of  the  Christian  religion  ;"  but  not  clear  what  he 
would  substitute  for  it.  Many  opinions  and  prac- 
tices held  sacred  and  dear  by  most  Christians,  were 
by  him  openly  and  sarcastically  denounced  ;  but 
his  own  \aews  were  concealed,  or  cautiously  and  ob- 
scurely revealed.  The  title  of  his  monthly  periodi- 
cal— "  The  Christian  Baptist" — might  seem  to 
identify  him  with  the  Baptist  denomination  ;  but 
the  appearance  was  illusory.  Agreeing  with  the 
Baptists  on  the  action  and  subjects  of  baptism,  he 
differed  widely  from  them  on  the  design  of  the  ordi- 
nance, and  on  many  other  doctrinal,  experimental 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   CHAOS.  25 

and  practical  subjects  ;  and  in  the  sequel  tliey  re- 
ceived a  full  share  of  his  censure  and  opposition. 
True,  he  constantly  and  earnestly  insisted  that  the 
Scriptures  are  the  only  and  sufficient  rule  of  faith 
and  practice,  but  in  this  opinion  there  was  nothing 
distinctive.  He  held  it  in  common,  not  only  with 
the  evangelical  Protestant  sects,  but  with  Unita- 
rians, Universalists,  and  almost  every  class  of  reli- 
gious fanatics  and  errorists. 

Mr.  Campbell  aspired  to  the  honor  of  being  a 
Reformer.  The  changes  wliich  he  wrought  in  some 
of  the  churches  are  styled  by  him  and  liis  admirers 
the  Reformation.  That  a  reformation  was  needed 
by  the  Christian  sects  of  that  time  none,  who  pos- 
sess a  tolerable  acquaintance  with  their  condition, 
and  the  claims  of  the  Gospel,  will  deny.  Indeed, 
what  church,  or  member  of  a  church,  does  not,  in 
some  respects,  and  in  some  degree,  need  reforma- 
tion ?  There  was  needed  then,  as  at  all  times,  an 
increase  of  religious  knowledge  in  the  churches, 
but,  more  than  this,  an  increase  of  piety.  The 
reformation  demanded  by  the  times  was  in  spirit 
and  practice,  rather  than  doctrine.  They  were 
then,  as  now,  far  too  worldly,  formal  and  ineffi- 
cient. Among  the  Baptist  churches  there  were  some 
sad  evils.  In  parts  of  the  country,  the  churches 
were  infected  with  an  antinomian  spirit,  and  blight- 
ed by  a  heartless,  speculative,  hair-splitting  ortho- 
doxy.    These  churches  were  mostly  penurious,  op- 


o 


26  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   CHAOS. 

posed  to  Christian  missions,  and  all  enlarged  plans 
and  self-denying  efforts,  for  promoting  the  cause  of 
Christ.  In  general,  the  careful  study  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, the  religious  education  of  children,  the  pro- 
per observance  of  the  Lord's  day,  a  wholesome, 
scriptural  discipline,  the  reasonable  support  of  pas- 
tors, and,  in  fine,  devotion  to  the  Redeemer's  cause, 
were  too  much  neglected.  The  pious  and  intelli- 
gent fathers,  before  Mr.  C.  was  heard  of,  saw,  con- 
fessed and  lamented  these  evils  ;  and  sought,  in  a 
kind  and  faithful  manner,  to  correct  them.  But 
they  are  not  of  easy  correction.  Having  their  root 
in  habit,  or  established  opinions,  or,  worse  still,  in 
depravity,  they  can  be  eradicated  only  by  the  divine 
blessing  on  judicious  and  faithful  efforts.  Had  he 
labored,  with  discrimination,  fairness  and  fidelity 
for  the  correction  of  these,  and  similar  evils,  even 
if  his  zeal  had  not  always  been  tempered  with  dis- 
cretion, nor  his  courage  with  moderation,  he  would 
not  have  incurred  the  displeasure,  or  provoked  the 
opposition  of  the  intelligent  and  candid  in  the  Bap- 
tist denomination.  He  attacked  some  of  these 
evils  with  ability,  but  in  a  spirit  and  manner  far 
better  adapted  to  irritate  than  to  convince  ;  and 
even  those  who  were  reformed  by  his  arguments, 
lost  as  much  in  spirit  as  they  gained  in  knowledge, 
and  became  fiery  disputants  rather  than  meek  and 
lowly  Christians.  But  his  plans  of  Reformation 
were,  by  no  means,  limited  to  the  evils  which  have 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    CHAOS.  27 

been  specified.  His  views  on  the  subject  were  radi- 
cal. He  seemed  to  be  commissioned  to  "pluck  up, 
to  pull  down,  and  to  destroy."  Scarcely  anytliing 
believed  or  practiced  among  Cliristians  met  bis  ap- 
probation. He  gave  himself  up  to  the  compara- 
tively easy,  and  not  very  profitable  task,  of  fault- 
finding. But  to  indulge  no  longer  in  general  re- 
marks, it  is  proper  to  descend  to  particulars. 

The  object  of  Mr.  Campbell's  first  and  most  viru- 
lent attack  was,  what  he  styled,  the  "  Kingdom  of 
the  Clergy."  The  term  clergy  is  not  found  in  our 
English  version  of  the  Scriptures.  It  was  at  the 
beginning  of  this  Keformation,  as  at  present,  used, 
and  well  understood,  to  mean  ministers  of  the  gos- 
pel— ^men  whose  olQfice  it  is  to  give  religious  instruc- 
tion and  conduct  religious  worship.  It  was  rarely 
found  in  the  reports  of  ecclesiastical  bodies,  but  was 
commonly  employed  by  secular  writers  to  denote  the 
pastors  and  teachers  in  every  Christian  communion. 
The  clergy  of  this  country  were  a  numerous  class, 
invested  in  difierent  Christian  communions  with 
very  different  degrees  of  authority ;  but  in  all  exer- 
cising only  such  as  was  cheerfully  accorded  to  them 
by  the  people  among  whom  they  labored.  Entirely 
destitute  of  civil  power,  they  had  no  means  of  main- 
taining their  spiritual  authority  but  the  sanctity  of 
their  lives,  the  usefulness  of  their  labors,  the  weight 
of  their  arguments,  and  the  consent  of  their  flocks. 
They  were  an  important  class  ;  and  they  derived  ^ 


28  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    CHAOS. 

their  importance  from  their  official  station,  their  va- 
rious toils,  and  their  extended  religious  influence. 
They  were  by  no  means  foultless.  Some  of  them 
were  ignorant,  conceited  and  vain  ;  others  were 
proud,  haughty  and  imperious  ;  others  still,  were 
hypocritical,  mercenary  and  base  ;  and  not  a  few 
were  worldly,  selfish,  and  sycophantic.  Against 
these  evils,  no  vigilance  or  fidelity  on  the  part  of 
the  churches,  or  their  rulers,  could  perfectly  provide. 
Among  the  twelve  apostles,  one  was  a  devil.  But 
as  a  body,  the  clergy  of  the  evangelical  denomina- 
tions were  iDtelligent,  pious,  self-denying,  diligent, 
and  faithful  in  their  vocation.  Among  them  were 
many  men  of  shining  abilities,  and  most  exemplary  de- 
votion to  the  cause  of  Christ — the  excellent  of  the 
earth.  Considering  their  talents,  and  their  position 
in  society,  no  class  of  the  community  was  so  meagerly 
rewarded  for  their  toils  and  sacrifices.  Many  labored 
for  nothing,  but  the  pleasure  of  doing  good — a 
larger  number,  perhaps,  for  a  bare  support — and 
very  few  were  able,  after  maintaining  themselves 
and  their  families,  to  lay  by  a  surplus  from  their 
salaries  for  a  season  of  affliction  or  infirmity. 
These  statements  wUl  scarcely  be  called  in  question 
by  any  person  having  information  on  this  subject, 
and  possessing  common  candor.  To  discriminating 
and  just  censures  of  the  clergy,  no  reasonable  objec- 
tion can  be  offered.  Their  official  rank  should  not 
phield  them  from   merited   reproach,  but,    rather. 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   CHAOS.  29 

BulDJect  their  conduct  to  a  more  rigid  scrutiny,  and 
their  sins  to  a  severer  condemnation.  But  every 
friend  of  religion,  morality  and  good  order,  must  re- 
volt at  seeing  them  rudely  attacked,  ridiculed,  tra- 
duced, and  held  up  to  the  scorn  of  the  infidel  and 
blasphemer.  In  all  time,  they  have  been  subject  to 
the  reproach  and  scoffing  of  sceptics  and  opposers 
of  the  Gospel  ;  but  it  was  surely  strange  that  a 
Christian  minister  should  vie  with  these,  or  even 
exceed  them,  in  their  congenial  work. 

Mr.  Campbell's  first  aim  was  to  overthrow  the 
power  and  influence  of  the  popular  clergy. 

•'  To  see  Christians,"  he  wrote,  "  enjoy  their 
privileges,  and  to  see  sinners  brought  from  darkness 
to  light,  are  the  two  great  objects  for  which  we  de- 
sire to  live,  to  labor,  and  to  suffer  reproach."  This 
was  very  well.  But  by  what  means  did  he  propose 
to  secure  these  important  objects  ?  He  shall  an- 
swer. "In  endeavoring  to  use  our  feeble  efforts 
for  these  glorious  objects,  we  have  found  it  necessar}^, 
among  other  things,  to  atteiApt  to  dethrone  the  reign- 
ing popular  clergy  from  their  high  and  lofty  seats, 
which  they  have  for  ages  been  building  for  them- 
selves  In  opposmg  and  exposing  them,  and 

their  kingdom,  it  is  not  to  join  the  infidel  cry  against 
priest  or  priestcraft  ;"  (certainly  not !)  "  it  is  not 
to  gratify  the  avaricious  or  the  licentious  ;  b'lt  it  is 
to  pull  down  their  Babel,  and  to  emancipate  those 
whom  they  have  enslaved,  to  free  the  people  from 


30  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS   CHAOS. 

iheir  unrighteous  dominion  and  unmerciful  spolia- 
'.ion."  Chn.  Bap.,  32. 

The  clergy  were  informed,  no  little  to  their  sur- 
prise, that  their  order  had  its  origin,  not  merely  in 
the  perversion  of  Christianity,  but  in  the  specula- 
tions of  the  most  ancient  pagan  philosophers.  Lis- 
ten to  his  words. 

"  Little  do  many  think,  and  indeed  little  do  they 
know,  that  the  modern  clergy  are  indebted  to  Py- 
thagoras, Socrates,  Plato,  Aristotle,  Zeno,  Epicu- 
rus, and  a  thousand  pagan  philosophers,  Jewish 
and  Christian  theorists,  for  the  order  of  things 
which  they  found  ready  to  their  hand,  as  soon  as  they 
put  on  the  sacerdotal  robes."     Chn.  Bap.,  54. 

It  would  be  easy  to  fill  a  volume  with  quotations 
resembling  the  above,  but  it  is  unnecessary — these 
may  serve  as  specimens.  Mr.  C.  employed  all  the 
resources  of  his  various  learning  and  fertile  genius 
to  subvert  the  influence  of  tlie  clergy,  and  bring 
them  into  popular  contempt.  They  were  stigma- 
tized as  "  textuaries,"  '-^  scrap-doctors,"  "  theoretic 
doctors,"  "  pop iilars,"  "  priests,"  "hirelings,"  and 
"  goat-milkers."  The  Third  Epistle  of  Peter  is  an 
ingeniously  written  burlesque  of  the  clergy,  with 
just  truth  enough  to  make  it  plausible  and  biting, 
and  divert  attention  from  its  gross  exaggeration,  and 
merciless  injustice.  Chn.  Bap.  166.  They  were, 
in  Mr.  Campbell's  estimation,  a  set  of  mercenaiy 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   CHAOS.  31 

hirelings,  actuated  in  their  labors  by  no  better 
motive  than  the  love  of  lucre. 

"  They  have/'  said  he,  "  shut  up  every  body's 
mouth  but  their  own  ;  and  theirs  they  will  not  open 
unless  they  are  paid  for  it."  "  A  hireling  is  one 
who  prepares  himself  for  the  office  of  a  '  preacher,* 
or  '  minister,'  as  a  mechanic  learns  a  trade,  and  who 
obtains  a  license  from  a  congregation,  convention, 
presbytery,  pope,  or  diocesan  bishop,  as  a  preacher 
or  minister,  and  agrees  by  the  day  or  sermon,  month 
or  year,  for  a  stipulated  reward." 

According  to  this  definition,  the  man  who  from 
love  to  Christ  and  souls,  prepares  himself,  by  the 
most  earnest,  attentive  and  prayerful  study  of  the 
Scriptures,  for  the  Christian  ministry,  and  receives 
for  his  ministerial  toils  a  stipulated  reward,  even 
though  that  reward  may  be  far  less  than  he  could 
receive  in  some  respectable,  secular  avocation,  is  a 
hireling.  Lest,  however,  a  suspicion  should  arise 
that  Mr.  Campbell's  teaching  on  this  subject  has 
been  misunderstood,  we  must  have  another  quota- 
tion from  his  pen. 

"  Upon  the  whole,  I  do  not  think  we  will  err  very 
much  in  making  it  a  general  rule,  that  every  man 
who  receives  money  for  preaching  the  Gospel,  or  for 
sermons,  by  the  day,  month,  or  year,  is  a  hireling  in 
the  language  of  truth  and  soberness." — Chn.  Bap., 
71,  233. 

It  is  due  to  Mr.  C.  to  remark,  that  he  admitted 


4 


32  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    CHAOS. 

that  there  were  some  good  men  among  the  clergy — 
a  few,  who  differing  from  their  class,  were  pure  in 
spite  of  the  corrupting  influence  of  their  office.  It 
is  proper,  also,  to  state  that  in  the  commencement 
of  his  editorial  labors,  he  specially  excepted  the 
"  Elders  or  Deacons  of  a  Christian  Assembly,"  from 
all  his  censures  of  the  "  Christian  Clergy."  Chn. 
Bap.,  8.  Who  these  "  Elders  and  Deacons"  were, 
it  is  not  easy  to  determine.  At  that  time  Mr.  C. 
was  connected  with  the  Baptist  denomination,  and 
very  few,  if  any  congregations,  had  embraced  his 
peculiar  views.  It  probably  had  reference  to  the 
officers  of  Baptist  churches  bearing  these  titles  ;  it 
was  not  long,  however,  before  he  discovered  that 
there  were  clergy  in  these  churches  as  well  as  in 
others.     He  writes — 

"  There  is  one  spirit  in  all  the  clergy,  whether 
they  be  Romanist  or  Protestant,  Baptist  or  Pgedo- 
baptist,  learned  or  unlearned,  their  own  workmanship, 
or  the  workmanship  of  others."     Chn.  Bap.,  94. 

It  is  fair  to  permit  Mr.  C.  to  define  what  he  means 
by  a  Baptist  clergyman.  "  I  have  known,  he  writes, 
"  a  young  Baptist  priest  made  and  finished  in  Phil- 
adelphia, go  to  the  State  of  New  York,  preach  a 
few  times  to  a  rich  congregation,  give  in  his  letter, 
and  in  two  or  three  weeks  be  called  out  from  among 
the  brethren  to  become  tjieir  bishop  ;  and  that,  too, 
before  he  has  got  a  wife,  or  a  house,  or  a  family  to  rule 
well.     Such  teachers  I  must  rank  among  the  clergy. 


CAMPBELLISM  IN   ITS   CHAOS.  33 

and,  indeed,  they  soon  prove  themselves  to  have  a 
full  portion,  and  sometimes  a  double  portion  of  the 
spirit  of  the  priesthood/'     Chn.  Bap.,  94. 

It  is  not  quite  clear  what  constituted  the  claim 
of  this  "  young  priest"  to  rank  among  the  clergy. 
Was  it  the  fact  that  he  was  educated  in  Philadel- 
phia— that  he  became  the  bishop  of  a  wealthy  con- 
gregation— or  that  he  had  not  "  got  a  wife" — or 
was  it  all  these  circumstances  combined,  that  made 
him  one  of  the  clergy  ?  The  Baptists,  neither  in 
Philadelphia,  nor  elsewhere,  deemed  any  man,  either 
young  or  old,  fit  to  take  upon  himself  the  sacred 
ofl&ce  of  bishop,  without  furnishing  evidence  of  sin- 
cere piety,  and  a  desire  to  enter  on  the  episcopal 
work,  and  possessing  suitable  qualifications  for  the 
service.  They  might  entertain,  as  doubtless  in 
many  cases  they  did,  defective  views  of  episcopal 
qualifications,  and  they  might  be  deceived  in  the 
motives  of  candidates  for  the  office,  but  in  no  in- 
stance did  they  knowingly  induct  any  man  into  the 
office  without  judging  him  to  be  holy,  of  good  re- 
port, and  possessed  of  gifts  for  performing  its  func- 
tions. The  truth  is,  the  term  "  clergy,"  in  Mr. 
Camj)bell's  vocabulary,  denoted  all  ministers  of 
every  Chiistian  denomination,  who  did  not  adopt  his 
peculiar  views,  enter  into  the  spirit  of  his  Reforma- 
tion, and  co-operate  with  him  in  the  accomplish- 
ment of  his  plans. 

Simultaneously  with  Mr.  Campbell's  attack  on  the 


34  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    CHAOS. 

clergy,  lie  denounced  all  Creeds  or  Confessions  of 
Faith,  as  the  fruitful  source  of  discord,  schism,  and 
mischief.  The  term  "  Creed,"  in  its  ecclesiastic 
sense,  denotes  a  summary  of  Christian  doctrine. 
There  is  in  Christendom  a  great  variety  of  creeds, 
from  the  so-called  Apostle's  Creed  down  to  the 
Christian  System,  composed  by  Mr.  Campbell,  as 
an  exhibition  of  the  principles  of  *his  Eeformation. 
Some  are  in  the  main  sound,  and  some  are  unsound  ; 
some  are  evangelical,  and  some  are  anti-evangelical ; 
the  worst  contain  some  truth,  and  the  best,  perhaps, 
some  error.  Of  the  lawfulness  of  writing  a  creed 
there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt.  Every  intelligent 
Christian  has  a  creed,  written  or  unwritten.  There 
are  certain  facts,  truths  and  principles,  which  he 
believes  and  maintains,  and  the  belief  of  which  he 
deems  essential  to  the  existence  of  true  holiness. 
He  may,  or  may  not  write  these  articles  of  his  be- 
lief, but  they  are  equally  his  creed  ;  and  equally 
efficacious  in  controlling  his  conduct,  whether  they 
be  written  or  unwritten.  The  writing  of  them  is 
merely  placing  in  a  visible  form  what  previously 
existed  in  his  mind  ;  and  doing  so  contravenes  no 
law.  of  Christ,  and  violates  no  moral  obligation. 
But  what  is  here  affirmed  of  an  individual,  may, 
with  equal  clearness  and  propriety,  be  affirmed  of  a 
church  of  Christ.  They  have,  and  of  necessity  must 
have,  a  creed — it  may  be  latitudinotis  or  rigid,  may 
comprehend  many  art  icles  or  few,  may  be  written  or 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    CHIOS.  35 

traditional — and  this  creed  is  their  bond  of  union. 
This  remark  is  as  true  of  the  churches  organized  by 
Mr,  Campbell,  as  of  any  churches  in  Christendom. 
They  profess,  indeed,  to  make  the  Bible  their  creed 
— but  to  say  nothing  of  the  fact  that  they  make  this 
profession  in  common  with  all  Christian  denomina- 
tions, and  with  Mormons — there  is  a  grand  fallacy  in 
it.  It  is  not  the  Scriptures  objectively,  but  subject- 
ively considered — in  other  words,  not  the  Scriptures 
as  they  exist  in  the  original  languages,  but  the  Scrip- 
tures as  they  are  understood,  interpreted,  and  main- 
tained by  themselves — that  form  the  basis  of  their 
union.  There  are  certain  points  of  Scripture  doc- 
trine in  which  they  agree,  and  by  which  they  are 
identified.  These  may  be  few,  and  may  seem  to 
them  to  be  unequivocally  contained  in  the  Bible — 
but  the  belief  of  these  is  indispensable,  to  admission 
into  their  fellowship.  They  do,  it  is  true,  insist 
that  their  members  shall  speak  of  Bible  things  in 
Bible  terms.  To  restore  a  pure,  or  Scriptural 
speech,  is  one  of  the  main  objects  of  the  Reforma- 
tion for  which  Mr.  C.  pleads.  But  in  their  boasted 
purity  of  speech,  there  lurks  another  great  fallacy. 
They  do  not  use  Bible  terms.  The  Bible,  with  a 
few  slight  exceptions,  was  written  in  the  Hebrew  and 
Greek  tongues  ;  and  they  derive  their  theological 
terms  from  a  translation  of  the  Bible  made  by  falli- 
ble men.  Besides,  Bible  terms  are  of  no  significance 
or  value  but  as  they  are  understood  ;  and  they  may 


36  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    CHAOS. 


serve  tlie  purposes  of  ignorance,  error,  or  hypocrisy, 
as  well  as  of  knowledge.  In  fine,  if  men  are  united 
by  tlie  adoption  of  certain  terms,  or  phrases,  even 
though  these  may  he  Scriptural,  apart  from  the 
meaning  attached  to  them,  they  are  influenced  hy 
sound  rather  than  sense — ^by  form  rather  than  sub- 
stance— ^by  appearance  rather  than  truth. 

Creeds,  like  everything  else,  human  and  divine, 
that  comes  within  mortal  reach,  may  be  used  for 
good  or  evil  purposes.  To  prevent  or  correct  misre- 
presentations, to  promote  unity  of  faith,  and  to 
secure  the  instruction  of  church  members,  and  their 
children,  in  the  most  important  principles  and 
duties  of  the  Christian  system,  are  considerations 
which,  in  the  view  of  the  intelligent  and  candid, 
justify  the  drawing  up  and  printing  of  a  creed. 
There  are  certain  principles — such  as  the  existence 
of  God — the  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures — the  re- 
surrection of  Christ,  &c. — ^the  belief  and  admission 
%  of  which  are  deemed  by  every  church,  indispensable 
*^-  to  fellowship  ;  and  it  may  be  wise  and  necessary  for  a 
church  in  some  cases,  to  avow  and  proclaim  them. 
fWhen  the  Brush  Eun  church,  of  which  Mr.  Campbell  ) 
was  a  member,  sought  to  gain  fellowsliip  with  the 
Eedstone  Association,  they  presented  "a  written  de- 
claration of  their  belief,"  drawn  up,  no  doubt,  by  the 
Reformer  himself.  Chn.  Bap.,  p.  92.  »  And  why  was 
'  this  creed  presented  but  for  the  purpose  of  satisfy- 
ing the  Redstone  Association  that  the  Brush  Run 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   CHA.OS.  37 

church  was  worthy  of  Christian  fellowship  ?  And 
if  it  was  lawful  for  this  church  to  publish  her  "  de- 
claration of  belief/'  to  prove  her  title  to  fellowship, 
it  must  have  been  equally  lawful  for  the  Bedstone 
Association,  oi  any  Christian  church,  to  publish  her 
"  declaration  of  belief,"  to  show  whom  she  thought 
worthy  of  fellowship.  Indeed,  the  Redstone  Asso- 
ciation in  receiving  the  Brush  Run  church  into  her 
fellowship,  on  her  "  written  declaration  of  belief," 
did,  in  the  most  solemn  and  authoritative  manner, 
adopt  and  avow  that  declaration  as  her  creed.  That 
creeds  have  sometimes  been  employed  for  unlawful 
and  mischievous  purposes,  no  one  acquainted  with 
ecclesiastical  history  can  question.  /  They  have  too 
frequently  been  used  as  a  substitute  for  the  Scrip- 
tures, to  embalm  error,  and  to  bind  the  consciences 
of  men,  and  have,  in  many  instances,  engendered  a 
spirit  of  speculation,  strife,  and  persecution,  and 
led  to  the  most  painful  schisms. 

Whether  it  is  expedient  for  all  churches,  under 
all  circumstances,  to  publish  a  creed,  is  a  question 
which  it  is  not  proposed  to  discuss.  My  opinion  is 
that  it  is  not.  Churches  have  flourished  without  a 
written  creed — and  by  this  is  meant,  that  they  hare 
adhered  to  divine  truth,  abounded  in  the  fruits  of 
righteousness,  and  have,  in  a  good  degree,  secured 
the  ends  of  their  organization.  On  the  other  hand, 
churches,  having  sound,  evangelical  creeds,  have. 


38t.-  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    CHAOS. 

in  many  instances,  sunk  into  formality,  error  and 
corruption. 

Mr.  C.  was  not  alone  in  Ms  opposition  to  creeds. 
Many  good  and  wise  men  doubted  their  expediency, 
and  others  were  convinced  that,  on  the  whole,  they 
were  of  mischievous  tendency.  A  majority  of  the 
Baptist  churches  in  the  United  States,  had  no  writ- 
ten creed  at  all,  and  the  few  that  did  have,  had  only 
a  very  brief  summary  of  doctrine,  practically  of 
no  moment.  But  Mr.  C.  was  from  temperament 
or  habit  essentially  an  ultraist.  His  onslaught, 
on  creeds  was  fierce,  and  indiscriminate.  It  was 
the  boasted  peculiarity  of  his  Eeformation  that 
it  was  hostile  to  all  creeds,  heterodox  or  ortho- 
dox, bad  or  good.  "  So  far  as  this  controversy  re- 
sembles them,"  (he  says,  referring  to  other  contro- 
versies concerning  creeds,)  "  in  its  opposition  to 
creeds,  it  is  to  be  distinguished  from  them  in  this 
all-essential  attribute,  viz.  : — that  our  opposition  to 
creeds  arose  from  a  conviction  that  whether  the 
opinions  in  them  were  true  or  false,  they  were  hos- 
tile to  the  union,  peace,  harmony,  purity,  and  joy 
of  Christians  ;  and  adverse  to  the  conversion  of 
the  world  to  Jesus  Christ."  Chn.  Sys.,  9.  How- 
opinions  in  harmony  with  the  Bible,  embracing 
fundamental,  soul-saving  truths,  lucidly,  concisely, 
and  systematically  expressed — should  produce  such 
direful  effects,  it  would  puzzle  an  ordinary  man  to 
conceive  ;  but  so  Mr    0.  believof^  and  maintained. 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS    CHAOS.  39 

And  I  must,  too,  do  him  the  justice  to  state,  that 
his  course  was  in  perfect  harmony  with  this  convic- 
tion. All  creeds,  Komanist  and  Protestant,  Calvin- 
istic  and  Arminian,  rationalistic  and  evangelical, 
voluminous  confessions  of  faith,  and  concise  sum- 
maries of  doctrine,  came  in  for  an  equal  share  of  his 
denunciations.  If  there  was  any  difference,  the 
Westminster  Confession  of  Faith,  (Preshyterian,) 
and  the  Philadelphia  Confession  of  Faith,  (Baptist,) 
received  the  largest  measure  of  his  censure.  All 
churches  having  creeds  were,  according  to  his  views, 
involved  in  the  same  condemnation  and  corruption. 
The  purity,  the  wisdom,  the  intrinsic  excellence  of 
their  creed,  could  not  preserve  them  from  a  blight. 
That  I  may  do  no  injustice,  and  save  myself  from 
the  suspicion  of  exaggeration,  I  will  quote  his  own 
language.  "  The  worshipping  establishments  now 
in  operation  throughout  Christendom,  increased  and 
cemented  by  their  respective  voluminous  confessions 
of  faith,  and  their  ecclesiastical  constitutions,  are  not 
churches  of  Jesus  Christ,  hiit  the  legitimate  daugh- 
ters of  that  mother  of  harlots,  the  Church  of  Rome." 
Mill.  Har.,  vol.  3,  362.  "  What  of  the  apostacy— do 
you  place  all  the  sects  in  the  apostacy  ?  Yes  ;  all 
religious  sects  who  have  any  human  bond  of  union  ; 
all  who  rally  under  any  articles  of  confederation" — 
that  is,:  summary  of  doctrine,  however  Scriptural, 
clear,  aiSr  important — "other  than  the  Apostle's 
doctrine  ' — that  is,  according  to  the  Bethany  voca- 


40  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   CHAOS. 

bulary,  the  whole  volume  of  revelation — "  and  who 
refuse  to  yield  all  homage  to  the  ancient  order  of 
things" — that  is,  the  long-lost  Gospel,  disinterred 
by  Mr.  Campbell.  Mill.  Har.,  vol.  3,  362.  From 
these  quotations,  it  appears,  that  according  to  the 
"  ancient  Gospel,"  as  understood  at  Bethany,  any 
body  claiming  to  be  Christian,  adopting  a  summary 
of  doctrine,  as  fundamental  articles  of  belief,  though 
the  articles  be  true,  and  the  belief  of  them  indispen- 
sable to  salvation,  is  no  church  of  Christ — but  a 
sect — a  harlot — and  the  daughter  of  a  harlot. 

The  writer  is  reminded  of  a  discourse,  which,  not 
long  since,  he  heard  Mr.  C.  deliver — a  discourse 
whose  doctrine  was  in  striking  harmony  with  the 
above  extracts.  His  text  was,  Eph.  iv.  4-6.  His 
theme  was  chiefly  the  unity  of  the  body  of  Christ, 
The  church,  he  insisted,  was  a  hody — not  a  mass, 
but  an  organized,  symmetrical,  and  beautiful  body. 
But  Christ  has  only  one  hody — a  head  with  seven 
bodies  would  be  a  monster.  But  if  Christ  has  only 
one  body,  what  body  is  it  ?  Not  the  Roman 
Catholic  body — not  the  Episcopalian — not  the  Pres- 
byterian— not  the  Lutheran — not  the  Methodist — 
not  the  Baptist.  He  did  not  inform  us,  however, 
what  body  is  the  body  of  Christ ,  He  trusted  in  the 
intelligence  and  candor  of  his  hearers  to  infer  that 
the  body  of  Christ  is  the  body  that  embraces  the 
"ancient  Gospel,"  and  that  has  restored  the  "an- 
cient order  o  '  things."     The  sermon  was  eloquent. 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    CHAOS,  4] 

plausible,  and  sopliistical.  If  a  head  with  seven 
bodies  is  a  monster,  a  head  without  a  body  is  useless. 
It  is  natural  to  inquire.  If  the  party  adopting  the 
peculiar  views  of  Mr.  C,  is  really  the  body  of  Christ, 
where  was  his  body  before  the  light  shone  from 
Bethany,  and  while  all  the  sects  were  in  the  smoke 
and  bondage  of  Babylon  ? 

All  this  sophistry  vanishes  before  Scriptural  defi- 
nitions of  the  term  church.  It  is  used  in  two  dis- 
tinct senses  in  the  New  Testament.  In  some  places 
it  means  an  organized,  visible  body  of  believers, 
assembling  in  one  place  for  the  worship  of  Christ. 
In  this  sense  of  the  term,  we  read  of  the  "  church 
of  God  which  is  at  Corinth,"  "  the  churches  of 
Galatia,"  "  the  churches  of  Judea,"  &c.  The  Apos- 
tolic churches  were  all  built  on  the  same  founda- 
tion, governed  by  the  same  laws,  animated  by  the 
same  spirit,  and  all  co-operated  in  the  same  good 
cause  ;  but  they  did  not  constitute  one  great,  organ- 
ized hierarchy.  If  ^Hhe  church"  in  this  sense  of 
the  term,  was  the  body  of  Christ,  then  he  had  more 
than  one  body — ^he  had  seven  bodies  in  Asia,  and 
we  know  not  how  many  in  Judea,  Galatia,  and  other 
regions.  In  a  few  places  the  word  church  signifies 
the  whole  body  of  believers  in  Christ.  This  is  the 
church  for  which  he  gave  himself,  Eph.  v.  25.  This 
is  the  body  of  which  he  is  the  head,  Eph.  i.  22,  23. 
To  this  body  belong  all  in;whcra  dwells  the  Para- 
clete,  whatever  their  name,  oi  visible  connections, 


42  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    CHAOS. 

may  be.  Of  this  body,  tbe  true  Christiaps,  admit- 
ted'by  Mr.  C.  to  be  found  among  the  sects,  are  liv- 
ing members.  The  churches  of  the  Keformation  do 
not  constitute  this  body,  but  the  pious  among  them 
are  components  of  it.  Now,  the  sophism  of  Mr.  C. 
consisted  in  substituting  the  former  for  the  latter 
sense  of  the  term  church  in  his  text — a  sense  which 
it  does  not  fairly  admit. 

When  Mr.  Campbell  commenced  his  Keformation, 
he  found  various  benevolent  or  religious  associations 
in  existence,  having  for  their  object  the  diffusion 
of  Divine  truth,  and  the  extension  of  the  kingdom 
of  the  Messiah.  Among  these  institutions  we  may 
mention  Mission,  Bible,  Tract,  and  Education  So- 
cieties, and  Sunday  Schools,  whose  titles  indicate, 
with  sufficient  precision,  to  the  common  reader, 
their  respective  spheres  of  operation.  The  objects 
contemplated  by  these  associations  were  of  the  high- 
est importance,  and  appealed  most  powerfully  to 
the  sympathies  and  liberality  of  the  pious.  It  were 
uncandid  to  deny  that  they  originated  with  wise 
and  good  men,  in  the  love  of  truth,  and  in  an  ear- 
nest desire  to  promote  the  salvation  of  sinners,  and 
the  glory  of  the  Redeemer,  that  they  were  sustained 
by  the  generous  sacrifices,  fervent  prayers,  and  self- 
denying,  and,  in  some  cases,  heroic  labors  of  their 
friends  ;  and  that  they  had  been  successful  in  a 
measure  corresponding  with  these  toils  and  sacrifices, 
and  adapted  to  inspire  gratitude  for  the   past,  and 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS   CHAOS.  43 

confidence  in  regard  to  the  future.  Whether  the 
best  plans  had  been  adopted  to  carry  forward  the 
work  of  evangelization  was  certainly  a  debatable 
question ;  and  none  were  more  solicitous  for  its 
proper  solution  than  those  who  were  most  promi- 
nently and  actively  engaged  in  the  prosecution  of 
these  various  plans.  To  affirm  that  vanity,  selfish- 
ness, and  sectarian  zeal  had  no  part  in  the  main- 
tenance of  these  schemes,  would  be  to  affirm  what 
no  person,  the  least  acquainted  with  the  imper- 
fections of  human  nature,  would  beKeve.  /But  it 
may  be  safely  affirmed,  that  since  the  days  of  primi- 
tive Christianity,  no  systematic  efibrts  for  the  diffu- 
sion of  truth  and  piety  have  involved  so  large  an 
amount  of  self-denial,  privation,  toil,  sacrifice  and 
suffering,  as  modem  missions  to  the  heathen,  with 
their  various  kindred  enterprises.  The  friends  and 
supporters  of  the  different  benevolent  institutions 
s\-erc  (Entitled  to  the  most,  candid  and  liberal  treat- 
tnent  from  those  who,  differing  from  them  as  to  the 
expediency  of  their  plans,  sympathized  with  them 
in  the  sublime  and  glorious  objects  at  which  they 
aimed. 

Mr.  Campbell  commenced  his  editorial  career  with 
pretty  strong  opposition  to  these  rehgious  enterprises. 
Finding  them  identified  with  what  he  called  the 
[)opular  Christianity  of  the  day,  he  deemed  it  ne- 
-c>Kary  to  subvert  their  influence  that  his  reforma- 


44  CAMPBELLISM  IN   ITS   CHAOS. 

tion  might  triumph.  In  his  preface  to  the  Chris- 
tian Baptist,  he  thus  wrote  : 

"There  is  another  difficulty  of  which  we  are 
aware,  that,  as  some  objects  are  manifestly  good, 
and  the  means  attempted  for  their  accomplishment 
manifestly  evil,  speaking  against  the  means  em- 
ployed we  may  be  sometimes  understood  as  opposing 
the  object  abstractly,  especially  by  those  who  do  not 
wish  to  understand,  but  rather  to  misrepresent. 
For  instance — that  the  conversion  of  the  heathen 
to  the  Christian  religion  is  an  object  manifestly  good 
all  Christians  will  acknowledge  ;  yet  every  one  ac- 
quainted with  the  means  employed,  and  of  the 
success  attendant  on  the  means,  must  knoAv  that 
these  means  have  not  been  blessed  ;  and  every  in- 
telligent Christian  must  know  that  many  of  the 
means  employed  have  been  manifestly  evil.  Besides, 
to  convert  the  heathen  to  the  popular  Christianity 
of  these  times  would  be  an  object  of  no  great  con- 
sequence, as  the  popular  Christians  themselves,  for 
the  most  part,  require  to  be  converted  to  the  Chris- 
tianity of  the  New  Testament."     Chn.  Bap,,  4. 

It  is  not  surprising  that  the  Eeformer,  convinced 
that  the  sects  did  not  preach  the  "  ancient  Gospel," 
and  needed  themselves  to  be  converted  to  the  Chris- 
tianity of  the  New  Testament,  should  have  been 
without  sympathy  for  their  missionary  schemes. 
They  were,  in  his  judgment,  unauthorized  by  Christ, 
and  subversive  of  his  throne  and  government.     His 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    CHAOS.        ^^--,.  45 

plan  for  the  conversion  of  the  world,  or  what  ne 
supposed  the  Divine  plan,  was  first  to  convert  all 
Christiai\  sects  to  the  Christianity  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament. Till  this  desirable  object  could  be  attain- 
ed, not  an  efibrt  was  to  be  put  forth  for  the  conver- 
sion of  the  heathen.  "An  attempt,"  said  he,  "to 
convert  Pagans  and  Mahometans  to  beKeVe  that 
Jesus  is  the  Son  of  God,  and  the  sent  of  the  Father, 
is  also  an  attempt  to  frustrate  the  prayer  of  the 
Messiah,  and  to  subvert  his  throne  and  government." 
Chn.  Bap.,  135.  But  even  after  the  conversion  of 
the  Christian  sects,  and  their  union  in  one  church, 
no  missionaries  are  to  be  sent  forth  for  the  conver- 
sion of  the  heathen.  "The  Bible,"  he  says,  "gives 
us  no  idea  of  a  missionary  without  the  power  of  work- 
ing miracles.  Miracles  and  missionaries,"  and,  he 
might  add,  preaching  the  Gospel,  "are  inseparably 
connected  in  the  New  Testament."  Chn.  Bap.,  15. 
Christians  must  "form  themselves  into  societies 
independent  of  hireling  priests  and  ecclesiastical 
courts,  modelled  after  the  forum,  the  parliament, 
or  national  conventions,"  and  "  cast  to  the  moles 
and  to  the  bats  the  Platonic  speculations,  the  Pytha- 
gorean dreams,  and  Jewish  fables  they  have  written 
in  their  creeds ;"  "  return  to  the  ancient  model  de- 
lineated in  the  New  Testament ;"  "and  keep  the 
ordinances  as  delivered  to  them  by  the  apostles." 
Then  suppose  a  Christian  church  were  to  be  placed 
on  the  confines  of  a  heathen  land,  as  some  of  them 


4&  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   CHAOS. 

must  inevitably  be,  the*  darkness  of  paganism  will 
serve,  as  a  shade  in  a  picture,  to  exhibit  the  lustre 
of  Christianity.  Then  the  heathen  around  them 
will  see  their  humility  ;  their  heavenly-mindedness, 
their  hatred  of  garments  spotted  with  the  flesh, 
their  purity,  their  chastity,  their  temperance,  their 
sobriety,  their  brotherly  love  ;  they  will  observe  the 
order  of  their  worship,  and  will  fall  down  in  their 
assemblies,  as  Paul  affirms,  and  declare  that  God  is 
in  them  of  a  truth."  Such  was  the  Bethany  plan 
for  evangelizing  the  world.  But  if  the  work  of 
evangelization  on  the  "  confines  of  heathen  lands  " 
should  progress  slowly,  and  it  should  seem  desirable 
to  adopt  more  active  and  aggressive  measures  for  its 
prosecution — then  to  avoid  the  necessity  of  sending 
missionaries,  for  which  there  is  no  scripture  author- 
ity, if  there  can  "be  found  such  a  society,"  as  that 
above  described,  though  it  be  "  composed  of  but 
twenty,  willing  to  emigrate  to  some  heathen  land, 
where  they  can  support  themselves  like  the  natives, 
wear  the  same  garb,  adopt  the  country  as  their  own, 
and  profess  nothing  like  a  missionary  project;  should 
such  a  society  sit  down  and  hold  forth  in  word  and 
deed  the  saving  truth,  not  deriding  the  gods  nor 
the  religion  of  the  natives,  but  allowing  their  own 
works  and  example  to  speak  for  their  religion,  and 
practicing  as  above  hinted;  we  are  persuaded  that, 
in  process  of  time,  a  more  solid  foundation  for  the 
conversion  of  the  natives  wc'^ild  be  laid,  and  more 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    CHAOS,  47 

actual  success  resulting,  than  from  all  the  mission- 
aries employed  for  twenty-five  years.  Such  a  course 
would  have  some  warrant  from  Scripture,  but  the 
present  has  proved  itself  to  be  all  human."  Chn. 
Bap.,  1'6-17. 

It  is  not  my  purpose  to  discuss  at  large  this 
scheme  for  evangelizing  the  world,  but  I  must 
make  a  few  remarks  in  passing.  That  churches 
should  be  pure  and  conformed  to  the  New  Testa- 
ment model ;  and  that  such  churches,  situated  on 
the  borders  of  heathen  lands,  or  elsewhere,  would 
exert  a  good  influence,  must  be  conceded.  That 
they  would  have  full  authority  to  emigrate  to  a 
heathen  country,  and  hold  forth  the  word  of  life  ; 
and  that  doing  so,  they  might  be  useful,  must  also 
be  admitted.  But  what  reason  there  is  for  claiming 
for  this  scheme  of  propagating  the  Gospel  peculiarly 
the  Divine  sanction,  I  know  not.  As  a  plan  for 
converting  the  heathen  it  is  sustained  neither  by 
apostolic  precept  nor  example.  Aggressions  on  the 
domain  of  heathenism  have  always  been  made  by 
missionaries — who  have  gone  forth,  singly  or  in 
small  bands,  with  or  without  the  power  of  working 
miracles,  with  the  truth  of  Christ  on  their  lips,  and 
the  love  of  Christ  in  their  hearts,  to  instruct,  per- 
suade and  convert  men,  and  to  found  churches  amid 
the  surrounding  darkness.  This  is  God's  plan — en- 
forced by  the  command  of  Christ,  and  the  example 
of  the  apostles — and  sanctioned  by  the  experience 


*5  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   CHAOS. 

of  the  Christian  world.     The  substitute  proposed 
by  Mr.  C.  is  untried,  impracticable,  chimerical. 

Had  theKeformerconfined  himself  to  the  advocacy 
of  his  new  scheme  of  convertinfij  the  world  to  Christ, 
or  to  candid,  generous  and  faithful  criticisms  on  the 
missionary,  and  other  benevolent  schemes  of  the 
time,  his  labors  would  probably  have  attracted  but 
little  attention,  or,  at  most,  would  have  produced 
no  serious  strife.  But  such  a  course  did  not  accord 
with  the  genius  and  spirit  of  the  man.  At  first, 
and  for  a  short  time,  he  wrote  rather  cautiously  and 
hesitatingly  concerning  Christian  missions.  "  It 
may  be  worthy,"  said  he,  "  of  the  serious  considera- 
tion of  many  of  the  zealous  advocates  of  the  various 
sectarian  missions  in  our  day,  whether,  in  a  few 
years,  the  same  things  may  not  be  said  of  their 
various  projects  which  they  themselves  afl&rm  of  the 
Catholic  missions,  and  missionaries."  Clm.  Bap., 
14.  But  this  inquiring  tone  soon  gave  place  to 
that  of  dogmatism  and  denunciation.  Upon  the 
benevolent  associations,  the  vials  of  his  unmitigated 
wrath  were  soon  poured  out.  All  the  resources  of 
his  learning,  wit,  and  ridicule,  were  employed  to 
undermine  their  influence,  and  bring  them  into  con- 
tempt. Whatever  was  published  in  infidel,  or  semi- 
infidel  papers  in  disparagement  of  missionaries,  was 
promptly  transferred  to  the  columns  of  the  Christian 
Baptist,  without  comment,  or  with  approbation  ; 
while  allusions  to  the  self-denials,  toils,  sufferings. 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    CHAOS.  49 

and  successes  of  missionaries,  were  studiously  omit- 
ted. Mr.  Campbell's  chief  instrument  in  opposing 
Christian  missions,  and  promoting  his  Reformation, 
was  caricaturing — an  art  for  which  his  genius  pecU' 
liarly  fitted  him.  But,  as  his  opposition  to  missions, 
and  cognate  enterprises,  had  much  influence  in  sev- 
ering the  Reformers  from  the  Baptists,  I  will  quote 
copiously  from  the  columns  of  his  monthly  pamphlet, 
pretty  much  at  random  on  these  topics. 

"  The  order  of  their  assemblies  (the  primitive 
churches,)  was  uniformly  the  same.  It  did  not  vary 
with  moons  and  seasons.  It  did  not  change  as  dress 
nor  fluctuate  as  the  manners  of  tke  times.  Their 
devotion  did  not  diversify  itself  into  the  endless 
forms  of  modern  times.  They  had  no  monthly  con- 
certs for  prayer  ;  no  solemn  convocations,  no  great 
fasts,  nor  preparation,  nor  thanksgiving  days. 
Their  churches  were  not  fractured  into  missionary 
societies,  Bible  societies,  education  societies ;  nor 
did  they  dream  of  organizing  such  in  the  world. 
The  head  of  a  believing  household  was  not  in  those 
days  a  president  or  manager  of  a  board  of  foreign 
missions  ;  his. wife  the  president  of  some  female  edu- 
cation society  ;  his  eldest  son,  the  recording  secre- 
tary of  some  domestic  Bible  society  ;  his  eldest 
daughter,  the  corresponding  secretary  of  a  mite 
society  ;  his  servant-maid,  the  vice-president  of  a 
rag  society  ;  and  his  I'ttle  daughter,  a  tutoress  of  a 
Sunday-school.     They  knew  nothing  of  the  hobbies 


50  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   CHAOS. 

of  modern  times.  In  their  churcli  capacity  alone 
they  move*!.  They  neither  transformed  themselves 
into  any  other  kind  of  association,  nor  did  they  frac- 
ture and  sever  themselves  into  divers  societies. 
They  viewed  the  church  of  Jesus  Christ  as  the 
scheme  of  Heaven  to  ameliorate  the  world  ;  as 
members  of  it,  they  considered  themselves  bound 
to  do  all  they  could  for  the  glory  of  God  and  the 
good  of  men.  They  dare  not  transfer  to  a  missionary 
society,  or  Bible  society,  or  education  society,  a 
cent  or  a  prayer,  lest  in  so  doing  they  should  rob 
the  church  of  its  glory,  and  exalt  the  inventions  of 
men  above  the  wisdom  of  God.  In  their  church 
capacity  alone  they  moved."     Chn,  Bap.,  6. 

"'Missionaries  to  Burmah. — On  Wednesday, 
the  11th  of  June,  at  Utica,  New  York,  the  Rev. 
Jonathan  Wade  and  his  consort  were  set  apart  as 
missionaries  to  the  Burman  empire,  by  a  committee 
of  the  board  of  managers  of  the  Baj)tist  General 
Convention,  An  interesting  sermon  was  delivered 
on  the  occasion  by  the  Rev.  Nathaniel  Kendrick, 
from  2  Tim.  ii.  10 .  '  Therefore  I  endure  all  things 
for  the  elects'  sake,  that  they  also  may  obtain  the 
salvation  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus  with  eternal 
glory.*  Rev.  Alfred  Bennet  led  in  offering  up  the 
consecrating  prayer.  Rev.  Daniel  Hascall  gave 
Mr.  Wade  an  appropriate  charge,  and  the  Rev.  Joel 
W.  Clark  gave  him  the  right  hand  of  fellowship, 
'  that  he  should  g«!  to  the  heathen  ;'  Rev.  John  Peck 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   CHAOS.  51 

addressed  Mrs.  Wado,  and  Rev.  Elon  Galusha  gave 
her  the  right  hand  of  fellowship.  Eev.  Elijah  F. 
Willey  offered  the  concluding  prayer.  The  services 
were  performed  in  Eev.  Mr.  Atkins'  meeting-house. 
The  day  was  fine,  and  the  assemblage  was  very 
large,  and  proved,  by  their  fixed  and  silent  atten- 
tion to  the  services,  how  much  they  felt  for  the 
world  that  lieth  in  wickedness  ;  and  by  a  collection 
of  $86.23  taken  on  the  spot,  they  showed  a  willing- 
ness to  share  in  the  pleasure  and  expense  of  spread- 
ing the  Gospel  in  all  the  earth. 

"  '  Mr.  Wade  is  a  young  man,  and  a  native  of  the 
state  of  New  York,  He  received  his  classical  and 
theological  education  in  the  theological  seminary  at 
Hamilton.  He  appeared  before  the  committee  a 
man  of  good  sense,  of  ardent  piety,  and  understand- 
ingly  led  by  the  Spirit  of  God  to  the  work  in  which 
he  has  now  engaged.  Mrs.  Wade  is  from  a  respect- 
able family  in  Hamilton,  Madison  County,  daughter 
of  deacon  Lapham.  Her  early  piety  and  active  zeal 
in  the  cause  of  her  Redeemer,  has  encouraged  the 
hope  that  she  will  be  eminently  useful  in  the  cause 
of  missions  with  her  husband. — Latter  Day  Lumi- 
nary,' 

"  Note  by  the  Editor. — How  accordant  is  the  lan- 
guage and  spirit  of  the  above  to  the  following 
passage  from  the  13th  chapter  of  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles  : — 'On  Wednesday,  the  11th  of  June,  A. 
D.  44,  the  Rev.  Saulus  Paulus  and  the  Rev,  Joses 


52  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   CHAOS. 

Barnabas  were  set  apart  as  missionaries  to  the  Gen- 
tiles dispersed  throughout  the  world,  by  a  commit- 
tee of  the  board  of  managers  of  the  Baptist  General 
Convention,  met  in  the  city  of  Antioch.  An  inter- 
esting sermon  was  delivered  on  the  occasion  by  the 
Rev.  Simon  Niger,  from  Isaiah  xlii.  4  :  '  The  isles 
shall  wait  for  his  law/  Rev.  Lucius,  of  Gyrene,  led 
in  offering  up  the  consecrating  prayer.  Rev.  Man- 
aen  gave  Mr.  Paulus  and  his  companion  (Mr. 
Barnabas)  an  appropriate  charge  ;  and  the  Rev. 
John  Mark  gave  them  the  right  hand  of  fellowship, 
'that  they  should  go  to  the  heathen.'  The  Rev. 
Lucius,  of  Gyrene,  offered  up  the  concluding  prayer. 
The  services  were  performed  in  the  Rev.  Mr.  Simon 
Niger's  meeting-house.  The  day  was  fine,  and  the 
assemblage  was  very  large,  and  proved,  by  their 
fixed  and  silent  attention  to  the  services,  how  much 
they  felt  for  the  world  that  lieth  in  wickedness  ;  and 
by  a  collection  of  $86.25,  they  showed  a  willingness 
to  aid  the  Rev.  Mr.  Paulus,  and  the  Rev.  Mr.  Bar- 
nabas in  carrying  the  Gospel  to  the  heathen. 

"  Mr.  Paulus  is  a  young  man,  and  a  native  of  the 
city  of  Tarsus  ;  he  received  his  classical  and  theo- 
logical education  in  the  theological  seminary  in 
Jerusalem.  He  appeared  before  the  committee  a 
man  of  good  sense,  of  ardent  piety,  and  understand- 
ingly  led  by  the  spirit  of  God  to  the  work  in  which 
he  has  now  enj^afjed. 

'"'  I    is,  then,  plain  that  the  above  notification  is 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   CHAOS.  63 

just  in  the  spirit  and  style  of  this  passage  from  the 
13th  chap:er  of  the  Acts.  But  in  the  common 
translation,  the  original  loses  much  of  its  apti- 
tude and  beauty  ;  for  lo  !  it  reads  thus  :  '  Now 
there  was  in  the  church  that  was  at  Antioch,  certain 
prophets  and  teachers  ;  as,  Barnabas,  and  Simon 
that  was  called  Niger,  and  Lucius  of  Gyrene,  and 
Manaen,  which  had  been  brought  up  with  Herod 
the  tetrarch,  and  Saul.  As  they  ministered  to  the 
Lord,  and  fasted,  the  Holy  Ghost  said.  Separate  me 
Barnabas  and  Saul  for  the  work  whereunto  I  have 
called  them.  And  when  they  had  fasted  and  prayed, 
and  laid  their  hands  on  them,  they  sent  them 
away.' "     Chn.  Bap.,  17. 

"  Our  objections  to  the  missionary  plan  originated 
from  the  conviction  that  it  is  unauthorized  in  the 
New  Testament ;  and  that,  in  many  instances,  it  is 
a  system  of  iniquitous  peculation  and  speculation, 
I  feel  perfectly  able  to  maintain  both  the  one  and 
the  other  of  these  positions Not  question- 
ing the  piety  and  philanthropy  of  many  of  the  ori- 
ginators, and  present  abettors  of  the  missionary 
plan,  we  must  say  that  the  present  scheme  is  not 
authorized  by  our  King.  This,  I  think,  we  proved 
some  time  ago  ;  and  no  man  that  we  have  heard  of, 
has  come  forward  to  oppose  our  views.  Indeed,  I 
think,  we  have  few  meq^f  any  information,  who  would 
come  forward  openly  to  defend  the  plan  of  saving  the 
worlil  by  II  cans  of  money  and  science  ;  of  converting 


54  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    CH&.OS. 

pagans  by  funds  raised  indirectly  from  spinning- 
wheels,  fruit  stalls,  corn-fields,  melon  patches,  potato 
lots,  rags,  children's  playthings,  and  religious  news- 
papers, consecrated  to  missionary  purposes  ;  and 
from  funds  raised  directly  by  begging  from  every 
body,  of  every  creed,  and  of  no  creed  whatever.  By 
sending  out  men  to  preach  begging  sermons,  and  to 
tell  the  people  of  A.'s  missionary  patch  of  potatoes 
producing  twice  as  much  per  acre,  as  those  destined 
for  himself  and  children  ;  of  B.'s  uncommon  crop  of 
missionary  wheat,  a  part  of  which  he  covetously 
alienated  from  the  missionary  to  himself,  and,  as  a 
judgment  upon  him,  his  cow  broke  into  his  barn  and 
ate  of  it  until  she  killed  herself ;  of  E/s  missionary 
sheep  having  each  yeaned  two  lambs  a-piece,  while 
his  own  only  yeaned  him  one  a-piece,  and  a  variety 
of  other  miracles  wrought  in  favor  of  the  missionary 
fund.  I  say,  what  man  of  good  common  sense  and 
of  a  reasonable  mind  would  come  forward  to  defend 
a  scheme  of  converting  the  world  b}''  such  means, 
and  by  the  means  of  that  very  '  vain  philosophy' 
and  '  science  falsely  so  called,'  condemned  by  the 
apostles."     Chn,  Bap.,  53,  54. 

^^  Mr.  Robert  Cautious  .  .  .  You  think  that  it  was 
rather  going  to  an  extreme  to  rank  Bible  societies 
with  other  popular  schemes.  Perhaps  a  more  inti- 
mate acquaintance  with  our  views  of  Christianity 
would  induce  you  to  think  as  we  do  upon  this  sub- 
ject.    We  are  convinced,  fully  convinced,  that  the 


^AMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    OHAOS,  55 

whole  head  is  sick,  and  the  whole  heart  faint  of 
modern  fashionable  Christianity — that  many  of  the 
schemes  of  the  populars  resemble  the  delirium,  the 
wild  fancies  of  a  subject  of  fever,  in  its  highest 
paroxysms — and  that  these  most  fashionable  projects 
deserve  no  more  regard  from  sober  Christians,  Chris- 
tians intelligent  in  the  New  Testament,  than  the 
vagaries,  the  febrile  flights  of  patients  in  an  inflam- 
matory fever.  We  admit  that  it  is  quite  as  difficult 
to  convince  the  populars  of  the  folly  of  their  pro- 
jects, as  it  generally  is  to  convince  one  in  a  febrile 
reverie,  that  he  is  not  in  the  possession  of  his 
reason,"     Chn.  Bap.,  33. 

"  I  honestly  confess  that  the  popular  clergy  and 
their  schemes  appear  to  me  fraught  with  mischief  to 
the  temporal  and  eternal  interests  of  men,  and 
would  anxiously  wish  to  see  them  converted  into 
useful  members,  or  bishops,  or  deacons  of  the 
Christian  church.  How  has  their  influence  spoiled 
the  best  gifts  of  heaven  to  men  !  Civil  liberty  hag 
always  fallen  beneath  their  sway — the  inalienable 
rights  of  men  have  been  wrested  from  their  hands — 
and  even  the  very  margin  of  the  Bible  polluted  with 
their  inventions,  their  rabbinical  dreams  and  whim- 
sical nonsense.  The  Bible  cannot  be  disseminated 
without  their  appendages,  and  if  children  are  taught 
to  read  in  a  Sunday  school,  their  pockets  must  be 
filled  with  religious  tracts,  the  object  of  which  ia 
either  directly  or  indirectly  to  bring  them  under  the 


56  CAMPBfiLLISM    IN   ITS   CHAOS. 

domination  of  some  cree  1  or  sect.  Even  the  dis- 
tribution of  the  Bible  to  the  poor,  must  be  followed 
up  with  those  tracts,  as  if  the  Bible  dare  not  be 
trusted  in  the  hands  of  a  layman,  without  a  priest 
or  his  representative  at  his  elbow.  It  is  on  this  ac- 
count that  I  have,  for  some  time,  viewed  both 
*  Bible  societies,'  and  '  Sunday  schools,'  as  a  sort 
of  recruiting  establishments,  to  fill  up  the  ranks  of 
those  sects  which  take  the  lead  in  them.  It  is  true 
that  we  rejoice  to  see  the  Bible  spread,  and  the  poor 
taught  to  read  by  those  means  ;  but  notwithstand- 
ing this,  we  ought  not,  as  we  conceive,  to  suffer  the 
policy  of  many  engaged  therein  to  pass  unnoticed, 
or  to  refrain  from  putting  those  on  their  guard  who 
are  likely  to  be  caught  by  '  the  sleight  of  men  and 
cunning  craftiness.'  "     Chn.  Bap.,  80. 

The  foregoing  extracts  pretty  clearly  indicate  the 
spirit  and  manner  of  Mr.  Campbell's  warfare  against 
Christian  missions,  and  similar  enterprizes.  Some 
points  in  them,  however,  are  entitled  to  special  at- 
tention. 

Notice,  in  the  first  place,  a  manifest  fallacy  in 
argument.  The  argument  is  implied,  not  distinctly 
expressed,  by  Mr.  C.  It  is  this — all  religious  insti- 
tutions not  existing  in  the  days  of  the  apostles  are 
unauthorized.  There  were  no  mission  and  Bible 
societies  in  the  days  of  the  apostles.  Therefore 
these  societies  are  unauthorized.  The  fallacy  in  the 
argument  lies  'n  not  distinguishing  between  what  is 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   CHAOS.  57 

essential  and  what  is  circumstantial  in  Christianity 
— a  difference  fully  admitted  by  Mr.  C.  Chn.  Sys., 
p.  74.  Christianity  has  its  doctrine,  facts,  laws, 
and  promises  ;  and  these  are  settled  and  immutable ; 
but  many  things  relating  to  the  progress  and  estab- 
lishment of  Christianity  were,  of  necessity,  left  to 
be  decided  by  time  and  circumstances — in  short,  by 
expediency.  In  the  days  of  the  apostles,  there 
were  no  translations  of  the  Scriptures,  no  houses, 
80  far  as  we  are  informed,  erected  for  religious  wor- 
ship, no  religious  periodicals,  no  Christian  editors, 
and  no  alms-houses  ;  but  are  aU  these  unauthor- 
ized ?  May  not  Christian  churches,  and  individual 
Christians,  combine  for  any,  and  every  good  purpose, 
in  such  manner  as  they  may  deem  expedient,  pro- 
vided that  in  so  doing  they  violate  no  law  of  Christ  ? 
But  what  law — what  moral  obligation,  is  violated 
by  missionary  societies  ?  They  propose  to  convert 
the  world  to  Christ — ^is  this  right  ?  They  propose 
to  accomplish  the  work  by  the  promulgation  of  the 
Gospel  of  Christ — is  this  authorized  ?  They  pro- 
pose to  diffuse  the  light  of  the  Gospel  by  sustaining 
and  encouraging  men  who  believe  and  love  the 
Gospel,  and  exemplify  its  excellence  in  their  lives, 
to  proclaim  it  among  the  heathen — is  this  unauthor- 
ized ?  The  truth  is,  if  Christians  are  authorized  to 
do  any  thing,  they  are  authorized,  as  churches  or 
individuals,  to  enter  into  any  combinations,  or  em- 
ploy any  means,  not  interdicted  by  divine  authority, 

3- 


58  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    CHAOS. 

to  spread  the  knowledge  of  salvation.     "  Let  Mm 
that  hearetJi  say,  Come." 

In  the  nest  place,  direct  your  attention  to  Mr. 
Campbell's  usual  art  of  caricaturing,  and  aiming  to 
bring  into  derision,  sacred  and  solemn  things.  One 
among  many  instances  of  its  exercise  may  be  select- 
ed for  illustration.  The  account  furnished  by  the 
Latter  Day  Luminary  of  the  setting  apart  of  Mr. 
and  Mrs.  Wade  as  missionaries  to  Burmah  is  plain, 
unostentatious,  solemn,  and  in  good  taste.  Mr.  and 
Mrs.  Wade  hare  proved  themselves,  by  a  long  life, 
to  be  eminently  humble,  self-denying,  and  devoted 
servants  of  Christ.  The  ministers  who  participated 
in  the  services  of  the  occasion  were  among  the  best 
men  living — venerable  for  their  age,  their  piety, 
their  wisdom,  and  their  labors.  The  services  were 
most  appropriate — consisting  of  prayer,  preaching 
the  word,  suitable  addresses,  and  giving  the  right 
hand  of  fellowship.  The  assembly  was  large,  atten- 
tive, and  deeply  interested  ;  and  the  scene  was  one 
on  which,  no  doubt,  angels  looked  with  delight,  and 
God  with  approbation.  Had  such  men,  in  such  a 
service,  and  under  such  circumstances,  erred,  their 
2rror  would  have  deserved  to  be  treated  with  the 
greatest  candor  and  forbearance.  Yet  this  very 
scene  is,  in  a  note  by  the  Editor  of  the  Christian 
Baptist,  caricatured,  with  heartless  and  revolting 
levity  ;   and  that  too  at  a  period  when  the  writer 


CA.MPBELLISM   IN    ITS    CUAOS,  59 

could  not  plead  in  extenuation  )f  his  course  the  in- 
discretion of  youth. 

The  Christian  Baptist,  having  attained  a  wide 
circulation,  exerted  a  potent  injluence  against  the 
cause  of  Christian  missions,  and  Christian  henevo- 
lence  generally.  The  sentiments  which  it  incul- 
cated, and  the  spirit  which  it  infused,  on  these 
subjects,  were  too  congenial  to  the  indolence  and 
selfishness  of  human  nature,  not  to  meet  a  cordial 
reception  from  many.  Wherever  the  Christian 
Baptist  spread,  the  cause  of  missions  declined. 
"  Your  paper,"  wrote  a  Kentucky  correspondent, 
"has  well  nigh  stopped  missionary  operations  in 
this  State."  Chn,  Bap,,  144.  And  what  was  true 
of  its  blighting  influence  in  Kentucky,  was  equally 
true  of  its  influence  in  Virginia,  Ohio,  and  every 
place,  where  its  visits  were  welcomed. 

"  Christian  Experience  "  is  a  phrase,  not  found  in 
the  Scriptures,  and  not,  perhaps,  wisely  chosen, 
but  it  was,  at  the  commencement  of  Mr.  Campbell's 
reformation,  as  it  is  now,  in  very  common  use,  and 
of  well  defined,  and  well  understood  meaning. 
It  related  to  a  subject  of  great  importance — one 
held  in  the  highest  estimation  \y  all  evangelical 
Christians.  It  denotes  that  series  of  conflicts,  exer- 
cises and  emotions,  springing  from  a  gradual  know- 
ledge of  Divine  truth,  and  the  influence  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  which  results  in  the  conversion  of  the 
soul  to  Clirist,  and  accompanies  this  event      Much 


60  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITb    CHAOS. 

has  improperly  passed  under  the  name  of  Christian 
experience ;  and  great  mischief  has  arisen  from 
ignorance  or  misconception  on  the  subject.  Many- 
persons  have  mistaken  excitementSj  fancies,  dreams, 
and  other  extravagances,  for  genuine  conversion, 
and  not  unfrequently  amid  much  ignorance  and 
superstition  have  been  found  the  marks  of  sincere 
piety.  Christian  experience  is  greatly  modified  by 
temperament,  education,  religious  instruction,  and 
the  circumstances  under  which  conversion  occurs. 
Men  of  a  phlegmatic  temperament  may  embrace 
the  Gospel  with  comparatively  little  feeling.  Men 
of  ardent  temperament  and  vivid  imaginations,  like 
John  Bunyan,  and  Colonel  "Gardiner,  are  likely  to 
receive  the  Gospel  with  intense  and  overwhelming 
emotions,  and  these  emotions  are  sometimes  accom- 
panied by  fancied  "visions  and  revelations."  We 
should  carefully  distinguish  between  what  is"  circum- 
stantial and  what  is  essential  in  Christian  experience. 
We  should  separate  the  chaff  from  the  wheat.  All 
that  is  superstitious,  visionary,  extravagant — in  fine, 
all  that  will  not  bear  the  test  of  Scripture,  should 
be  rejected  ;  but  we  should  beware  of  condemning 
the  precious  with  the  vile — the  genuine  with  the 
spurious.  Conviction  of  sin,  godly  sorrow,  faith  in 
Christ,  an  obedient  spirit,  love,  peace,  joy  and  hope, 
are  elements  of  genuine  Christian  experience.  No 
intelligent,  evangelical  Christian  has  ever  placed 
saving  ex  perience  in  any  thing  short  of  those  im- 


OAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS    CHAOS.  61 

pressions,  exercises  and  feelings  which  are  essential 
to  a  passage  "from  death  unto  life."  Every  godly- 
man  clings  with  unyielding  tenacity  to  the  reality 
of  his  Christian  experience.  He  would  no  sooner 
renounce  it  than  his  salvation.  There  may,  indeed, 
be  religion — its  name — its  form — its  pomp — its  sac- 
rifices— without  it ;  but  it  is  spiritless,  heartless 
and  worthless. 

Mr.  Campbell's  early  writings  on  the  subject  of 
experimental  religion  gave  great  pain  to  the  friends 
of  spiritual  Christianity.  Some  things  which  he 
published  on  this  subject  were  worthy  of  grave  con- 
sideration. He  exposed  with  clearness  and  severity 
the  illusions  and  extravagances  which,  among  the 
uncultivated  and  ignorant,  especially  the  negroes, 
was  current  as  Christian  experience.  These  evils 
were  seen,  deplored,  and  opposed  by  all  well  in- 
formed Christians,  long  before  he  commenced  his 
Reformation.  They  are  evils  inseparable,  perhaps, 
from  the  progress  of  earnest  piety  among  an  illite- 
rate and  excitable  people  ;  but  from  which  a  specu- 
lative, heartless  formalism  is  a  certain  preservative. 
He  condemned  the  practice  common  among  Baptists 
and  some  other  evangelical  Christians  of  requiring 
from  candidates  for  church  membership  a  relation 
of  their  experience.  The  practice  he  considered  to 
be,  not  only  unauthorized,  but  injurious.  That  it 
has  sometimes  been  abused  by  the  ignorant,  or  mis- 
judging, none  will  deny.;  but  that  churches  should 


62     •  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    CHAOS. 

avail  themselves  of  the  best  means  in  their  power — 
imperfect,  at  best — to  judge  correctly  of  the  sin- 
cerity, knowledge  and  piety  of  persons  wishing  to 
enter  into  their  fellowship,  sedms  evident  from  the 
nature  of  the  connexion.  And  a  brief,  clear  narra- 
tive of  their  religious  exercises,  or  direct  answers  to 
a  few  plain,  pertinent  questions  adapted  to  elicit 
information  on  this  subject,  will  greatly  facilitate 
this  object.  Philip  did  not  baptize  the  Ethiopian 
eunuch,  who  requested  baptism,  until  he  had  cate- 
chised him.  Acts  8 :  37.  True,  the  evangelist 
propounded  but  one  question  to  the  candidate — or, 
at  least,  in  the  concise  narrative  furnished  by  Luke, 
only  one  is  recorded — that,  under  the  circumstances, 
being  deemed  sufficient.  It  should  be  borne  in 
mind  that  the  Ethiopian  was  an  intelligent  man — a 
reader  of  the  Scriptures — ^hadbeen  to  Jerusalem  to 
worship — and  had  been  receiving  personal  instruc- 
tion from  Philip.  The  evangelist  asked  the  candi- 
date the  question  which  was  most  likely  to  elicit  the 
true  state  of  his  heart,  and  the  answer  was  satisfac- 
tory. This  example,  so  far  from  restricting  pastors 
or  churches,  in  the  examination  of  candidates  for 
baptism,  to  this  brief  and  single  question — a  ques- 
tion never,  so  far  as  we  are  informed,  proposed  to 
any  other  applicant  for  the  ordinance,  in  apostolic 
times — fairly  authorizes  them  to  make  such  in- 
quiries as  the  intelligence,  known  characters,  and 
circumstances,  of  the  candidates  may  appear  to  fe- 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    CHA03.  63 

quire.  But  whether  the  necessary  information 
shall  be  obtained  by  as^ng  questions,  or  by  the 
connected  narrative  of  the  candidates  for  church 
fellowship,  is  a  point  about  which  none  but  hair- 
splitting speculatists  would  stickle.  Though  Mr. 
Campbell  differed  from  the  Baptists  generally  on 
this  subject,  the  difference  would  have  caused  no 
serious  strife  between  them.  His  views  on  this 
point  were  not  peculiar.  Several  evangelical  de- 
nominations, held  in  high  and  deserved  estimation 
by  the  Baptists,  received  members  into  full  com- 
munion without  requiring  a  recital  of  their  Chris- 
tian experience.  What  the  Baptists  maintained 
was,  that  persons  were  not  entitled  to  church  mem- 
bership, without  the  various  exercises,  comprehend- 
ed in  conversion,  or  regeneration,  which  they 
termed  "  Christian  experience,"  and  which  are  par- 
ticularly pointed  out  in  the  commencement  of  this 
article.  On  this  point  they  have  never  wavered, 
and,  God  grant,  they  never  may.  The  propriety 
of  relating  an  experience  before  a  church  is  one 
thing — the  indispensable  necessity  of  an  experience 
— a  "  Christian  experience" — in  order  to  legitimate 
church  communion  is  another,  and  far  more  im- 
portant matter. 

Now,  it  was  in  regard  to  the  latter,  and  not  the 
former  point,  that  the  remarks  of  Mr.  Campbell 
caused  so  much  pain  among  considerate  and  earnest 
Christians.     He  treated  the   subject  with  a  levity, 


64  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS   CHAOS. 

sarcasm,  and  disregard  of  the  feelings  of  holy  men, 
which  can  be  fairly  characterized  by  no  term  less 
offensive  than  shocking.  Good  men  stood  aghast 
at  the  freedom  and  severity  with  which  he  treated 
a  subject  that  they  had  been  accustomed  to  regard 
with  feelings  of  awe,  not,  perhaps,  unmingled  with 
superstition.  It  is  just  to  him  to  say  that,  so  far  as 
I  can  perceive,  he  did  not  deny  the  reality  or  the 
necessity  of  what  others  termed  "  Christian  expe- 
rience," but  he  wrote  equivocally  on  the  subject. 
He  knew  that  he  was  accused  of  rejecting  Christian 
experience — spiritual  religion — and  that  his  peculiar 
views  of  faith  and  repentance  were  supposed  to  lead 
to  this  result — and  yet  the  frank  and  full  avowal  on 
these  points,  requisite  to  quiet  the  fears,  not  of  the 
captious,  but  of  the  intelligent,  pious  and  candid, 
who  looked  with  favor  on  some  portions  of  his  Ee- 
formation,  was  studiously  withheld.  Some  para- 
graphs, considered  alone,  would  appear  to  establish 
the  soundness  of  his  views  on  experimental  religion  ; 
but  others  would  throw  a  doubt  over  his  meaning. 
To  satisfy  those  who  called  in  question  the  correct- 
ness of  his  opinions  on  this  subject,  he  wrote — "  It 
is  said  that  we  have  taught  that  there  is  no  neces- 
sity of  being  born  again  by  the  Spirit  of  God  ;  and 
that  we  have  denied  that  Christians  are  new  crea- 
tures, and  that  we  have  confined  all  divine  grace  to 
the  apostolic  age.  Now  we  must  confess  that  we 
did.  not  intend  to  communicate  such  ideas  ;  nor  do 


CAMPBELLISM    IN   ITS   CHAOS.  65 

we  think  that  such  can  be  fairly  gathertfd  from  oui 
words."  But  83on  he  added — "  We  have  discovered 
that  something  under  the  name  of  "  experimental 
religion"  is  the  very  soul  of  the  popular  system" — 
and  the  reader  has  seen  the  estimate  in  which  he 
held  that  system.  Chn.  Bap.,  64.  See  also  pp. 
48-49. 

A  few  quotations  must  suffice  to  exhibit  the  views 
of  Mr.  Campbell  on  the  subject  of  experimental  re- 
ligion, and  his  spirit  and  manner  in  discussing  it. 

"It  is,  perhaps,  chiefly  owing  to  the  religious 
theories  imbibed  in  early  life  from  creeds,  cate- 
chisms, and  priests,  that  so  few  comparatively  enjoy 
the  grace  of  God  which  brings  salvation.  The  grace 
of  God,  exhibited  in  the  record  concerning  Jesus  of 
Nazareth,  affor»3  no  consolation.  The  hopes  and 
joys  of  many  spring  from  a  good  conceit  of  them- 
selves. If  this  good  conceit  vanishes,  which  some- 
times happens,  despondency  and  distress  are  the 
consequences.  While  they  can,  as  they  conceit, 
thank  God  that  they  are  not  like  other  men,  they 
are  very  happy  ;  but  when  this  fancied  excellency 
disappears,  the  glad  tidings  afford  no  consolation  : 
anguish  and  distress  have  come  upon  them.  This, 
with  some  of  the  spiritual  doctors,  is  a  good  symp- 
tom too  :  for,  say  they,  '  if  you  do  not  doubt  we 
ivill  doubt  for  you.'  When  they  have  worked  them 
into  despondency,  they  minister  a  few  opiates,  and 
nssiire  them  that  they  are  now  in  a  safe  and  happy 
f 


66  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    CHAOS 

state.  Now  they  are  to  rejoice,  because  they  are 
sorrowful ;  now  they  are  to  feel  very  good,  because 
they  feel  so  very  bad.  This  is  the  orthodox  '  Chris- 
tian experience.'  This  is  the  genuine  work  of  tlie 
Holy  Spirit  !"     Chn.  Bap.,  138. 

Did  Mr.  Campbell  really  believe  that  this  carica- 
ture, which  he  drew,  was  ^'the  orthodox  Christian 
experience" — "  the  genuine  work  of  the  Holy  Sj)irit" 
— for  which  the  evangelical  Christians  of  that  time 
pleaded  ?  It  is  charitable  to  think  so.  But  how 
a  man  of  Mr,  Campbell's  intelligence,  erudition, 
general  information,  and  accurate  observation,  could 
have  reached  such  a  conclusion,  it  is  not  easy  to 
comprehend.  It  will  not  be  denied  that  the  evil 
which  Mr.  Campbell  portrayed  was  real,  and  de- 
served correction.  In  all  religious  denominations 
there  may  be  ignorant,  enthusiastic  and  misguided 
teachers.  He  will  concede  that  there  are  such  in 
the  churches  enrolled  ucder  the  banner  of  his  own 
Reformation — or  if  he  should  not,  the  means  of  his 
conviction  are  at  hand.  But  is  it  fair  to  charge  the 
crudities  and  errors  of  such  teachers  to  orthodoxy  ? 
No  evangelical  Christian  denomination,  has  ever  en- 
dorsed such  an  experience  as  Mr.  Campbell  has  de- 
lineated in  this  paragraph,  either  from  his  prolific 
imagination,  or  the  teachings  and  doings  of  ignorant 
enthusiasts.  He  may  be  safely  challenged  to  furnish 
from  any  creed,  document,  accredited  writer,  or  re- 
spectable journal,  of  any  Christian  persuasion,  the 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS   CHAOS.  67 

outline  of  an  approved  experience,  so  defective  and 
unscriptural  as  this  "orthodox  Christian  expe- 
rience." I  have  been  in  the  Christian  ministry 
more  than  thirty  years,  and  I  have  no  recollection  of 
having  read  in  any  book,  or  heard  from  the  lips  of 
any  teacher,  approved  by  any  orthodox  Christian 
denomination,  the  description  of  a  saving  experience, 
which  did  not  include  Godly  sorrow,  the  renuncia- 
tion of  sins,  and  trust  in  Christ  for  salvation.  To 
represent  an  experience,  having  no  allusion  to  con- 
viction of  sin,  sorrow  for  it,  hatred  of  it,  the  aban- 
donment of  it,  faith  in  Christ,  love  to  him,  and  an 
obedient  disposition — in  short,  a  change  of  heart — 
not  as  the  experience  of  a  few  ignorant  and  excited 
enthusiasts — but  a3  "  the  orthodox  Christian  ex- 
perience"— "the  genuine  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit," 
is  to  misrepresent — it  may  be,  ignorantly,  or  care- 
lessly, or  in  the  heat  of  party  zeal — but  nevertheless 
to  misrepresent,  most  grossly,  the  class  of  men 
among  whom  is  to  be  found  most  of  the  intelligent 
piety  which  the  world  contains. 

It  is  proper  to  furnish  another  extract  on  this 
subject,  of  later  date,  but  of  similar  spirit.  Chn. 
Sys.,  p.  244,  245. 

"  Effects  OF  Modern  Christianity. — Our  great- 
est objection  to  the  systems  which  we  oppose,  is 
their  impotency  on  the  heart.  Alas  J  what  multi- 
tudes of  prayerless,  saintless,  Christless,  joyless 
liear'Sj  have  crowded  Cliristianity  out  of  the  congre- 


:<:■■■    ■  *^ 

68  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   CHAOS. 

gations  by  their  experiences  before  baptism  !  They 
seem  to  have  had  all  their  religion  before  they  pro- 
fessed it.  They  can  relate  no  experience  since 
baptism,  comparable  to  that  professed  before  the 
"  mutual  pledge"  was  tendered  and  received.  It 
was  the  indubitable  proofs  of  the  superabundance 
of  this  fruit,  which  caused  me  to  suspect  the  far- 
famed  tree  of  evangelical  orthodoxy.  That  cold- 
heartedness — that  stiff  and  mercenary  formality — 
that  tithing  of  mint,  anise,  and  dill — that  negligence 
of  mercy,  justice,  truth,  and  the  love  of  God,  which 
stalked  through  the  communions  of  sectarian  altars 
— that  apathy  and  indifference  about  '  thus  saith 
the  Lord' — that  zeal  for  human  prescriptions,  and 
above  all,  that  willing  ignorance  of  the  sayings  and 
doings  of  Jesus  Christ  and  his  apostles,  which  so 
generally  appeared,  first  of  all  created,  fostered,  and 
matured  my  distrust  in  the  reformed  systems  of 
evangelical  sectaries." 

When  Mr.  Campbell  commenced  his  labors,  the 
state  of  Protestant  Christendom  was  not  such  as 
the  pious  heart  might  desire.  In  all  communions 
there  were  obvious,  acknowledged,  and  grievous 
evils.  The  comparative  inefficacy  of  all  the  means 
employed  for  the  moral  renovation  of  men  (vas  but 
too  manifest.  All  good  men  united  ^vith  the  devout 
Psalmist  in  the  desire,  "  Oh,  let  the  wickedness  of 
the  wicked  come  to  an  end  !"  But  did  these  evils 
in  the  churches  spring  from    "  experiences  before 


CAMPBELLISM   IJK    ITS    CHAOS,  69 

baptism  ?"  Did  the  requiring  of  experiences  pre- 
paratory to  baptism  and  church  fellowship  crowd 
Christianity  out  of  the  churches,  by  introducing 
"  multitudes  of  prayerless,  saintless,  Christless,  joy- 
less hearts  ?"  Or  did  these  evils  originate  in  tho 
moral  corruption  of  human  nature,  and  the  deterior- 
ating tendencies  of  a  world  enslaved  by  sin  ?  A 
large  majority  of  the  evangelical  churches  did  not 
require  "experiences before  baptism ;"  what  "  crowd- 
ed Christianity"  out  of  them  ?  There  were  great 
and  deplorable  evils  in  the  churches  gathered  and 
instructed  by  the  apostles — and  that  too  before  they 
closed  their  ministry — did  "  experiences  before  bap- 
tism" produce  them  ?  The  truth  is,  nothing  could 
be  more  unfair,  un philosophical,  and  deceptive,  than 
to  reason  as  Mr.  Campbell  did.  He  had,  in  some 
respects,  an  easy  task  before  him.  It  demanded 
but  little  research  or  labor  to  detect,  publish,  and 
magnify  the  evils  in  the  various  Christian  commun- 
ions. All  these  evils  Mr.  Campbell  boldly  and 
confidently  ascribed,  without  discrimination,  fairness, 
or  qualification,  to ■  "•sectarian  bigotry,"  "popular 
Christianity," "evangelical  orthodoxy,"  or  ^'expe- 
riences be/ore  baptism."  With  equal  zeal  and 
assurance,  he  proclaimed  that  the  sovereign  remedy 
for  all  these  evils,  was  a  return  to  the  "  Ancient 
Gospel," — not  as  it  had  been  received  and  pmctised 
by  the  wise  and  good  of  every  land,  but  as  it  was 
understood  and  interpreted  at  Bethany.     Many  saw 


70  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   CHA03. 

and  deplored  these  evils,  earnestly  desired  their  cor- 
rection, and  embraced  the  Bethany  exposition  of  the 
Gospel  that  their  wishes  might  be  realized.  Churches 
were  organized  according  to  the  "  ancient  order  of 
things,"  from  which  there  is  no  danger  that  Chris- 
tianity ■will  be  crowded  out  by  "  experiences  before 
baptism."  The  public  have  had  an  opportunity  of 
comparing  the  fruits  of  the  Keformation  with  the 
fruits  of  "  the  far-famed  tree  of  evangelical  ortho- 
doxy." It  is  not  proper  to  anticipate  what  it  is  pro- 
posed to  state  in  another  part  of  this  work  ;  but  I 
will  mention  a  single  fact.  A  few  years  ago,  one 
of  the  earliest,  most  intelligent,  and  devoted  of  the 
friends  of  the  "  ancient  order  of  things,"  said  can- 
didly, that  the  Reformation  had  not  proved  as  per- 
fect in  practise  as  it  was  in  theory. 

Some  extracts  having  been  given  from  the  writings 
of  Mr.  Campbell,  as  specimens  of  his  manner  of 
treating  experimental  religion,  it  is  proper  that  he 
should  have  the  benefit  of  his  apology  for  tne  sevei 
ity  of  his  style. 

"  The  reader,"  he  says,  ""may  perhaps  think 
that  we  speak  too  irreverently  of  the  practice  and 
of  the  experience  of  many  Christians,  We  have  no 
such  intention.  But  there  are  many  things  when 
told  or  represented  just  as  they  are,  which  appear 
so  strange,  and,  indeed,  fanciful,  that  the  mere  rela- 
tion of  them  assuries  an  air  cf  irony."  Chn.  Bap., 
141.,  Note. 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   CHAOS,  71 

Whether  the  defense  mends  the  matier,  the 
reader  must  judge  for  himself.  Another,  if  not  a 
better,  apology  for  Mr.  Campbell's  course  may  be 
suggested.  If  he  was  really  convinced  that  "  or- 
thodox Christian  experiences"  were,  as  he  represent- 
ed them,  Christless,  graceless  and  senseless — an 
artificial  despondency  cured  by  noxious  opiates — 
then,  perhaps,  no  apology  was  necessary.  ■  We  can 
only  lament  that  a  man  of  his  conceded  abilities 
should  have  had  his  judgment  so  sadly  perverted — 
by  no  matter  what  baleful  influence. 

As  it  is  proposed,  in  another  part  of  this  volume, 
to  examine  particularly  the  principles  of  Campbell- 
ism,  I  shall  in  this  chapter  merely  glance  at  tliose 
luhich  distinguished  this  period  of  the  jReformation. 
It  has  been  already  observed,  that  the  teaching  of 
Mr.  Campbell,  through  the  columns  of  the  Christian 
Baptist,  was  negative  rather  than  positive — was  in- 
tended to  overthrow,  and  bring  into  disrepute  the 
popular  theology,  rather  than  to  develope  any  pecu- 
liar religious  principles.  The  current  teachings  of 
all  the  prevailing  Christian  sects,  whether  oral,  or 
written,  whether  in  creeds,  seri^ons,  expositions  of 
the  Scriptures,  or  any  other  form,  were  deemed  by 
him,  and  his  admirers,  vain  speculations,  philosophi- 
cal subtleties,  or  orthodox  nonsense.  Gradually, 
and  slowly,  however,  his  doctrinal  peculiarities 
began  to  be  ^volved.     Having  referred  to  the  period- 


72  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS    CHAOS. 

icals  and  other  works,  which  advocated  his  peculiar 
principles,  he  wrote — 

"  The  Christian  Baptist  in  seven  annual  vol- 
umes, being  the  first  of  these  publications,  and 
affording  such  a  gradual  development  of  these 
principles  as  the  state  of  the  public  mind  and  the 
opposition  would  permit,  is,  in  the  judgment  of 
many  of  our  brethren,  who  have  expressed  them- 
selves on  the  subject,  better  adapted  to  the  whole 
community  as  it  now  exists,  than  our  other  writ- 
ings."    Chn.  Sys.,  p.  10. 

Whether  Mr.  Campbell  did  not  express  his  doc- 
trinal views  clearly,  or  with  uniformity  ;  or  whether 
his  opponents  were  unable,  or  unwilling  to  compre- 
hend his  meaning,  need  not  now  to  be  decided.  I 
certainly  have  never  known  a  religious  teacher 
whose  views  were  involved  in  so  much  mist  and  un- 
certainty. From  his  writings  might  be  culled  pas- 
sages, which  would  satisfy  the  most  strenuous  ad- 
vocates of  orthodoxy  in  respect  to  his  soundness  in 
the  faith  ;  and  from'  the  same  pages,  other  passages 
which  seemed  to  threaten  the  very  foundation  of 
evangelical  Christianity.  By  some  he  was  charged 
with  holding  the  most  pestilential  errors ;  and  by 
others  he  was  considered  the  ablest  uninspired  ex- 
pounder of  the  Christian  faith.  It  began  to  be  ap- 
parent, however,  that  there  were  serious  discord- 
ances between  his  doctrinal  views  and  those  enter- 
tained by  evangelical  Christians,  and  especially  the 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITa    CHAOS.  73 

Baptists,  with  Avhom  he  was  particularly  connected. 
These  differences  had  reference  to  faith,  repentance, 
regeneration,  the  remission  of  sins,  the  influence  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  and  other  points  of  minor  import- 
ance. He  was  understood  to  teach  and  maintain 
that  faith  is  a  simple  persuasion  that  Jesus  is  the 
Messiah,  which  demands  no  influence  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  to  incline  the  mind  to  its  exercise — that  re- 
pentance is  a  reformation  of  life — that  regeneration 
is  identical  with  baptism — that  the  remission  of 
sins  is  enjoyed  only  through  baptism — and  that  the 
Holy  Spirit  is  bestowed  only  on  the  baptized.  On 
no  point,  perhaps,  did  his  teaching  give  such  general 
dissatisfaction  as  in  regard  to  the  influence  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  in  the  moral  renovation  of  man.  The 
Baptists,  in  common  with  other  orthodox  Chris- 
tians, held  this  doctrine  to  be  of  vital  importance. 
His  teaching  on  the  subject  was,  or  to  many  it 
seemed  to  be  evasive,  contradictory,  unsound,  and 
of  pernicious  tendency.  The  reader  will  perceiAC 
in  the  following  quotation  the  spirit  and  influence 
of  his  writings  on  this  solemn  and  important  sub- 
ject. 

"  I  read,  some  time  since,  of  a  revival  in  the 
state  of  New  York,  in  which  the  Spirit  of  God  was 
represented  as  being  abundantly  poured  out  on 
Presbyterians,  Methodists,  and  Baptists.  I  think 
the  converts  in  the  order  of  the  names  were  about 

three  hundred  P'esbyterians,  three  hundred  Metho- 

4 


74  CAMPBELLJ«M    IN    ITS   CHAOS. 

dists,  and  two^^undred  and  eighty  Baptists.  Oi 
the  principles  of  Bellamy,  Hopkins,  and  Fuller. 
these  being  all  regenerated  without  any  knowledge 
of^.tlie  Gospel,  there  is  no  difficulty  in  accounting 
^^or  their  joining  different  sects.  The  spirit  did  not 
teach  the  Presbyterians  to  believe  that  '  God  had 
foreordained  whatsoever  comes  to  pass  ;'  nor  the 
Methodists  to  deny  it.  He  did  not  teach  the  Pres- 
byterians and  the  Methodists  that  infants  were 
members  of  the  church,  and  to  be  baptized  ;  noi 
the  Baptists  to  deny  it.  But  on  the  hypothesis  of 
the  Apostle  James,  viz  :  '  Of  his  own  will  begat 
he  us  by  the  word  of  truth.'  I  think  it  would  be 
difficult  to  prove  that  the  Spirit  of  God  had  any 
thing  to  do  with  the  aforesaid  revival/'  Chn.  Bap., 
50. 

By  some  persons  Mr.  Campbell  was  suspected, 
and  charged  with  leaning  toward  Unitarianism. 
For  this  impression  I  have  never  found  any  good 
ground.  In  his  zeal  to  introduce  what  he  termed 
"  a  pure  speech,"  he  rejected  the  vfords  "  Trinity," 
and  "  Trinitarianism,"  and  also  seme  notions,  more 
or  less  prevalent,  concerning  the  Trinity  ;  but  so 
far  as  I  can  discover,  he  clearly  and  uniformly  main- 
tained the  doctrine  of  Christ's  Godhead,  and  the 
vicarious  and  expiatory  nature  of  his  sufferings. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  pursue  this  subject  much 
farther.  It  is  not  my  purpose  to  point  out  all  the 
sentiments  ind  practices  among  evangelical  Chris- 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS   CHAOS.  75 

tians  which  incurred  his  displeasure,  and  provoked 
liis  animadversions.  The  war  was  as  general  as  it 
was  fierce  and  relentless.  Nothing  was  so  venera- 
ble, so  sacred,  and  so  important,  in  the  estimation 
of  others,  or  so  strongly  entrenched  in  popular  favor, 
as  to  shield  it  from  his  attacks.  Objects,  in  them- 
selves confessedly  good,  were  denounced  because 
they  were  pursued  with  sectarian  zeal,  and  for  sec- 
tarian purposes.  In  all  the  pages  of  the  Christian 
Baptist  it  will  be  difficult  to  find  a  sentence  com- 
mendatory of  any  institution,  plan,  custom,  labor 
or  interest  of  Christendom,  apart  from  his  own 
chc  rished  Eeformatioa. 


CAMPBELLISM  IN  ITS  FORMATION. 

Various  causes  contributed  to  augment  the  in- 
fluence of  Mr.  Campbell,  to  diffuse  his  peculiar  no- 
tions, and  to  facilitate  the  progress  of  his  Reforma- 
tion. His  information,  self-command,  boldness,  and 
indomitable  ardor,  eminently  fitted  him  to  lead  a 
party.  His  temperament,  intellectual  habits,  and 
aspirations  were  all  adapted  to  impel  him  to  aban- 
don the  beaten  track  of  thought  and  labor,  and  to 
impart  to  his  writings  and  preaching  the  charm  of 
novelty.  His  views  might  not  be  scriptural,  or 
wise,  or  important  ;  but  they  were,  at  least,  un- 
common— and  this  was  sufficient  to  render  them 
acceptable  to  a  certain  class  of  minds.  By  his 
fearless  and  forcible  defense  of  the  distinctive  senti- 
ments of  the  Baptists,  in  his  debates  with  Messrs. 
Walker  and  McCalla,  he  secured  extensively  the 
confidence  and  esteem  of  the  denomination,  They 
were  proud  to  acknowledge  him  as  the  bold  and 
puissant  champion  of  their  cause — and  they  made 
the  acknowledgment  with  more  pleasure,  because 
he  had  risen  up  suddenly,  and  in  a  luarter  least  ex- 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    FORMATION.  77 

pected.  They  were,  therefore,  ready  to  pay  not 
only  a  candid  but  a  confiding  regard  to  anything  he  ' 
might  publish.  His  ability  and  prowess  as  a  public 
extempore  debater,  had  given  him  a  prestige  most 
favorable  to  his  influence  and  success.  His  oppo- 
nents too,  with  few  exceptions,  unwittingly  pro- 
moted the  Reformation.  Instead  of  an  open,  manly 
and  resolute  discussion  of  the  objectionable  points 
in  his  scheme ;  they  carried  on  a  petty  warfare,  cen- 
suring frequently  without  discrimination,  wasting 
their  resources  in  the  discussion  of  trifles,  and  always 
ready  to  retreat  at  the  first  appearance  of  serious 
danger.  I  do  not  intend  to  reflect  on  the  motives, 
or  abilities,  of  the  excellent  fathers  who  early  par- 
ticipated in  the  discussion  of  Campbellism — they 
pursued  the  course  to  which  their  judgment  or  their 
circumstances  led  them — but  Mr.  Campbell  was  too 
adroit  an  opponent  not  to  interpret  their  guerrilla 
warfare  as  a  jiroof  of  his  invincibility,  p,nd  the  sound- 
ness of  the  cause  which  he  had  espoused. 

His  opposition  to  sectarianism  has  been  already 
mentioned  ;  and  from  this  opposition,  he  not  only 
brought  on  himself  much  reproach,  but  derived  a 
large  measure  of  his  strength  and  influence.  On 
the  subject  of  sectarianism,  his  logic  was  precisely 
that  which  every  quack  employs  to  bring  hid  nos- 
trums irto  use.  He  expatiates  earnestly  on  the 
inefficiency  of  the  regular  medical  practice.  There 
•iro   some   diseases  for  which   })hysicians   have    no 


78  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS   FORMATION 

remedy ;  for  many  others  their  prescriptions  arc 
sadly  and  confessedly  unsuccessful ;  and,  in  not  a 
fe'w  cases,  their  drugs  have  proved  pernicious.  Phy- 
sicians of  the  greatest  wisdom  and  experience  have 
lamented  the  impeifection  of  medical  science,  and  the 
uncertainty  of  the  healing  art.  These  evils  and  ad- 
missions are  paraded  and  duly  magnified  before  the 
public,  by  the  empiric,  who  proclaims  his  certified  sove- 
reign panacea,  while  the  credulous,  and  those  who 
have  despaired  of  aid  from  science,  are  caught  by  the 
specious  artifice.  The  evils  of  sectarianism  were  ob- 
vious and  confessed.  The  division  of  Protestant  Chris- 
tendom into  numerous  rival  sects,  spending  their 
time,  wasting  their  energies,  embittering  their  spirits, 
and  afibrding  sport  for  their  adversaries,  by  their  sub- 
tle and  profitless  coiitroversies,  has  long  been  its  re- 
proach, its  curse,  and  its  blight.  It  is  an  evil  second 
in  magnitude  only  to  the  religious  uniformity,  which, 
resembling  the  quiet  of  the  cemetery,  is  the  off- 
spring of  bigoted  and  intolerant  despotism.  Of 
course,  in  these  remarks,  reference  is  had  to  the 
evils  growing  out  of  the  condition  of  the  Christian 
world.  The  mischiefs  of  sectarianism  were  delinea- 
ted by  Mr.  Campbell,  certainly,  with  no  fear  of  ex- 
aggeration. All  its  legitimate  evils  were  charged 
upon  it  ;  and  many  v/hich  with  equal  plausibility 
might  have  been  ascribed  to  other  cau-^cs.  Prom 
all  these  evils  he  promised  a  certaiy  and  speedy  de- 
liverance.    The  '' ancient   Gospel,"  or  the  Gospel 


t,.fl  rtfPBELLISM    IN    ITS    FORMATION.  79 

as  expounded  at  Bethany,  was  a  remedy  for  all 
these  disorders.  The  plan  of  relief  was  perfectly 
simple.  Nothing  was  necessary  to  abolish  sectarian- 
ism, and  its  bitter  fruits,  and  so  secure  the  perfect 
union  of  all  Christians,  but  the  belief  of  one  fact-^ 
that  Jesus  is  the  Messiah  ;  submission  to  one  insti- 
tution— immersion,  for  the  remission  of  sins  ;  and  a 
steady  conformity  to  the  apostles'  doctrine.  The 
scheme  was  defective,  visionary,  and  utterly  ineffi- 
cacious ;  but  it  was  plausible — it  promised  relief 
from  evils  seen,  felt  and  lamented — it  seemed  to  be 
the  only  prospect  for  relief  presented — and  many, 
cheated  by  the  illusion,  gladly  embraced  it. 

Another  cause  wliich  favored  the  progress  of  the 
reformation  was  the  prevalence  of  hyper-Calvinistic, 
or  antinomian  views  in  many  Baptist  churches. 
Having  adopted,  in  its  main  points,  the  Calvinian 
theology,  they  were  led  by  their  system  into  specu- 
lations as  unpopular  as  they  were  sterile.  To  free 
them  from  objections  and  render  them  acceptable 
to  their  auditors,  the  pastors  spent  a  large  portion 
of  the  time  devoted  to  pulpit  labors  in  their  discus- 
sion ;  and  what  occupied  so  much  of  their  thought 
grew  into  most  exaggerated  importance  in  their  es- 
timation. They  seemed  to  think  that  they  were 
called  to  the  ministry  for  no  other  purpose  than  to 
proclaim  and  vindicate  a  few  abstruse  and  barren 
points  of  the  Calvinistic  creed  ;  but  their  ministry, 
excepting  to  a  *"t'W  indoctrinated  zealots,  was  not 


80  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   FOKMATION. 

pleasing.  The  people  generally  becoming  disgusted 
with  such  dry,  and  unsatisfying  speculations,  were 
ready  to  attend  on  ^ny  ministry  which  promised 
them  a  more  palatable,  if  not  a  more  nutritious  diet. 
In  churches  of  this  sort  Mr.  Campbell  found  his  way 
prepared  before  him. 

His  opposition  to  Christian  missions,  and  other 
benevolent  enterprizes,  gained  him  many  friends. 
The  antinomian  Baptists  were,  almost  without  ex- 
ception, hostile  to  all  combined  and  self-denying 
efforts  among  Christians  for  spreading  the  know- 
ledge of  the  Gospel — a  hostility  derived,  in  part, 
from  their  peculiar  doctrinal  opinions,  and,  it  seems 
not  uncharitable  to  judge,  in  part,  from  their 
covetousness.  They  were  delighted  to  find  that 
they  had  in  Mr.  Campbell,  a  champion  in  their 
cause,  so  zealous  and  distinguished  ;  and,  though 
tbeir  doctrinal  sentiments  were  antipodal  to  his,  yet 
this  agreement  on  a  very  important  point,  as  they 
deemed  it,  disposed  them  to  pass  the  most  favor- 
able judgment  on  him,  and  his  system.  Nor  was 
this  pleasure  limited  to  antinomian  Baptists.  Mr. 
Campbell's  ridicule  of  missions,  and  kindred  efforts, 
was  too  much  in  harmony  with  the  selfishness  of 
human  nature,  and  the  money-loving  propensity  of 
the  age,  not  to  awaken  sympathy,  and  call  forth  ad- 
miration. An  intelligent  correspondent  of  the 
Christian  Baptist  thus  addressed  him  :  "  My  dear 
sir,  yfi  have  begun  wrong,  if  your  object  is  reform- 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS    FORMATION.  81 

atioii.  Never  attack  the  principle  whicli  multiplies 
the  number  of  Bibles,  or  which  promotes  the 
preaching  of  the  Gospel,  or  the  support  of  it,  if 
you  desire  Christianity  to  prevail.  As  I  informed 
you  when  here,  I  repeat  it  again,  your  opposition  to 
a  preached  Gospel,  to  the  preachers  and  Bible  so- 
cieties, secures  to  you  the  concurrence  of  the  covet- 
ous, the  ignorant,  the  prayerless  and  Christless 
Christians.  Should  they  have  had  any  religion, 
they  cease  to  enjoy  it  as  soon  as  they  embrace  your 
views."     Chn.  Bap.,  70. 

Mr.  Campbell's  opposition  to  the  clergy  had  much 
to  do  with  the  progress  of  the  Keformation.  Minis- 
ters of  the  Gospel  have  in  all  ages  and  couh- 
tries,  and  under  all  the  names  by  which  they  have 
been  distinguished,  had  to  bear  a  large  share  of  the 
"  reproach  of  Christ."  Whoever  ridicules  them, 
throws  suspicion  on  their  motives,  or,  in  any  way, 
undermines  their  influence,  with  whatever  pretence, 
is  sure  to  win  the  smiles,  and  receive  the  plaudits. 
of  a  certain  class  of  persons,  among  whom,  it  is  sad 
to  say,  may  be  found  professing  Christians.  Mr. 
Campbell  was  decidedly  politic  in  his  attacks  on  the 
clergy.  While  he  denounced  them,  he  flattered 
the  people.  They  did  not  need  to  hire  priests  for 
their  instruction — they  could  read  and  expound  the 
Scriptures  for  themselves — every  church  had  witliin 
itself  the  means  of  its  own  edification.  These  sen- 
timents were  too  congenial  to  the  independence  and 

4* 


82  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   FORMATION. 

pride  of  human  nature  not  to  find  a  cordial  recep- 
tion. Many  wh6  had  been  content  to  be  learners, 
after  reading  a  few  numbers  of  the  Christian  Bap- 
tist, were  elated  with  the  prospect  of  becoming 
teachers.  A  Reformation  which  promised  to  sink 
the  aristocratic  populars  and  to  elevate  the  masses 
far  above  their  former  teachers,  could  not  fail  to  se- 
cure the  approval  and  support  of  those  Avho  con- 
fided in  its  professions, 

I  know  not  how  much  influence  Mr.  Campbell's 
teaching  derived  from  its  Scotch  peculiarities,  but  I 
know  it  derived  some.  The  Scotch  are  remarkable 
for  the  tenacity  with  which  they  adhere  to  their  re- 
ligious opinions.  A  Scotchman  of  my  acquaint- 
ance, an  inteUigent  and  worthy  man — finding  that 
Mr.  Campbell  agreed  with  him  in  certain  unim- 
portant, but  cherished  opinions,  in  regard  to  which 
he  differed  from  his  brethren  generally,  was  induced 
to  pay  a  favorable  attention  to  the  "  ancient  Gros- 
pel,"  and  finally  to  become  its  earnest  advocate. 

The  chief  means  of  spreading  the  peculiar  views 
of  the  Bethany  Reformer  was  the  Christian  Baptist, 
— a  small,  cheap  periodical,  whose  circulation  was 
constantly  increasing.  To  their  development  and 
defense  its  pages  were  exclusively  devoted.  Almost 
all  who  read  it  were  either  disgusted  with  its  spirit 
and  sentiments,  and  spurned  it  from  them,  or  being 
gradually  brought  under  its  influence,  at  length, 
enlisted  under  tin  banner  of  the  Reformation.    Mr. 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    FORMATION.  83 

Campbell,  in  addition  to  his  editorial,  and  other 
literary  labors,  frequently  made  long  tours  in  Vir- 
ginia, Kentucky  and  Ohio,  every  where  proclaiming 
to  crowded  assemblies  the  principles  of  hisKeforma- 
tion.  His  sermons,  or  "  orations,"  as  he  styled 
them,  long,  and  sometimes  tedious,  were  heard  by 
some  with  disapprobation,  by  others  with  serious 
doubts  as  to  their  usefulness,  and  by  others  still 
with  indiiForence  ;  yet,  on  the  whole,  they  contrib- 
uted much  to  diffuse  the  knowledge  of  his  prin- 
ciples, promote  the  circulation  of  his  periodical,  and 
multiply  the  number  of  his  friends. 

Nor  must  it  be  forgotten  in  enumerating  the 
causes  which  facilitated  the  progress  of  the  Reform- 
ation, that  Mr.  Campbell  taught  many  important 
truths  ;  exposed  some  serious  evils  ;  furnished  some 
striking  expositions  of  Scripture  passages,  which, 
if  not  original,  were  new  to  his  hearers  j  and  labored 
diligently  to  awaken  an  interest  in  the  study  of  the- 
Scriptures. 

It  has  been  already  stated  that  it  was  not  Mr. 
Campbell's  purpose — certainly  not  his  avowed  pur- 
pose— to  form  a  new  sect,  but  to  abolish  all  sects. 
If  he  did  not  perceive,  he  was  the  only  intelligent 
observer  of  his  course  who  did  not  perceive,  its  direct 
and  inevitable  tendency  to  produce  that  result. 
His  spirit  was  eminently  sectayan.  What  is  sect- 
arianism, but  an  undue  confidence  in  the  soundness 
of  oui  views  of  Scripture  truth,  an  excessive  partial- 


84  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   FORMATION. 

ity  for  tlie  party  concurring  witli  ns  in  these  views, 
and  the  lack  of  candor,  tenderness,  and  forhearance 
towards  those  who  dissent  from  them  ?  When  tried 
by  this  standard,  no  enlightened  and  unbiased 
reader  of  the  Christian  Baptist  can  doubt  that  Mr. 
Campbell's  sectarianism  was  unmitigated.  Within 
the  wide  range  of  Christian  literature  there  cannot 
be  found  a  work  more  intolerant,  proscriptive,  and 
caustic.  Love  is  the  very  soul  of  piety,  and  the 
moving  principle  in  every  well-directed  effort  at 
reformation  ;  and  this  principle  will  develop  itself 
in  gentle  words,  candid  admissions,  and  a  due 
regard  to  the  feelings  and  motives  of  opponents,  as 
well  as  in  a  faithful,  earnest  exhibition  of  divine 
truth.  If  Mr.  Campbell's  object  was  to  ^^id  the^ 
formation  of  a  new  sect,  his  course  was'  'most  im- 
politic. Instead  of  commending  what  was  good, 
enduring  minor  evils,  and  kindly  seeking  to  correct 
the  serious  errors  in  the  different  Chrij^tian  sects  ;  he 
censured  their  views  and  practices  with  little  discri- 
mination, and  unsparing  causticity,  proclaiming  that 
they  were  all  in  Babylon,  and  their  religion  not  much 
better  than  paganism  ;  and  justified  his  severity  by 
the  example  of  Luther  in  contending  against  the 
Papists,  and  of  Christ  in  condemning  the  Scribes 
and  Pharisees.  Never  did  any  leader  more  per- 
fectly succeed  in  infusing  his  own  spirit  into  his 
followers,  than  did  Mr.  Campbell.  With  not  a  tithe 
of  liis  genius,  1  earning,  or  information,  they  did  not 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    FORMATION.  85 

yield  to  him  a  hair-breadth,  in  the  strength  of  their 
conviction,  that  their  new  religious  views  were 
Scriptural.  Many  of  them  were  almost  in  an 
ecstacy  that  having  been  so  long  in  the  darkness 
of  Babylon,  a  light,  so  eflfulgent  and  vivifying, 
should  have  suddenly  shined  upon  them,  A  shadow 
of  suspicion  that,  after  all,  they  might  misinterpret 
the  Scriptures  seemed  never  to  have  darkened  their 
minds.  A  fact  may  serve  to  illustrate  their  spirit, 
A  girl  of  my  acquaintance,  still  in  her  teens,  quite 
illiterate,  and  possessing  no  uncommon  genius,  had 
been  immersed  for  the  remission  of  sins.  On  meet- 
ing her,  I  found  that  she  had  entered  fully  into  the 
spirit  of  the  Reformation.  I  inquiredof  her,  whether 
she  was  satisfied  that  her  new  views  were  correct. 
She  replied,  "  I  can't  be  wrong — I  follow  the  Book." 
I  answered,  "I  acknowledge  that  the  Bible  is  .in 
infallible  guide;  but  I  am  not  quite  certain  that  you 
are  an  infallible  interpreter  of  it."  Our  conversa- 
tion was  continued  for  some  time,  and  I  could  not, 
by  any  argument  or  appeal,  extort  from  her  the 
confession  that  she  might  possibly  misinterpret  the 
Scriptures.  "  I  follow  the  Book,  and  can't  be 
deceived,"  was  her  unchanged  reply,  I  remember 
a  similar  case.  A  Reformer  invited  me  to  his  house 
for  the  ostensible  purpose  of  seeing  his  sick  wife, 
but  for  the  real  purpose,  as  it  appeared,  of  affording 
me  an  opportunity  of  learning  the  principles  of  the 
Reformation.     He  could  not  relid,  but  had  a  young 


86  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    FORMATION. 

daughter,  who  entered  fully  into  his  spirit  and  views, 
that  was  more  fortunate  in  this  respect,  than  her 
father.     The  Reformer  called  on  his  daughter  to 
read  certain  portions  of  Scripture  which  had  been 
selected  for  the  occasion,  and  she  complied  with  an 
air  and  manner  which   indicated  how  deeply  she 
thought  I  was  indebted  for  her  kindness.     He  then 
commenced  an  oration,  to  which  I  listened  without 
reply,  and  without  a  smile,  though  I  found  it  diffi- 
cult to  maintain  my  gravity,  until,  my  edification 
having  ceased,  I  abruptly  took  my  leave.     I  should 
not  deem  it  proper  to  mention  these  particular  cases, 
were  I  not  satisfied  that  all  acc[uainted  with  the 
^^arly  history  of  Campbellism  will  perceive  in  them 
iife-like  portraitures  of  many,  not  all — ^for    some 
were  modest,  courteous,  and  dignified — of  the  prim- 
itive Reformers.     I  greatly  misjudge  if  the  early 
disciples  of  Mr.  Campbell,  (I  do  not  use  the  phrase 
cpprobriously,)  were  not,  for  the  most  part,  restive, 
contentious,  and  factious.    How  could  they  be  other- 
wise ?     They  read  the  Christian  Baptist,  had  strong 
confidence  in "  the  wisdom  and  piety  of  its  editor, 
imbibed  its  spirit,  adopted  its  principles,  clothed 
themselves  with  the  armor  which  it  furnished,  entered 
heartily  into  all  the  schemes  which  it  advocated  foi 
the  destruction  of  creeds,  the  overthrow  of  the  clergy, 
the  arrest  of  benevolent  operations,  and,  in  short, 
the  "  restoration  of  the  ancient  order  of  things"  set 
up,  or  brought  to  light  at  Bethany  ;  and  aimed  to 


CAMPBELLISM    TN   ITS   FORMATION.  87 

a^  prove  themselves  worthy  followers  of  an  illustrious 
and  undaunted  leader. 

The   Baptists,  at  least  in  Virginia,  were  unpre- 
pared for  the  conflict  which  came  upon  them.    Their 
pastors,  mostly  plain  men,  with  limited  education, 
and  earnest  piety,  had  restricted  their  ]tu)1Ic  iusl  ruc- 
tions to  the  fundamental  principles  of  Christianity, 
and  were  unfitted  by  their  lack  of  early  training, 
and  by  their  confirmed  habits,  for  polemic  discus- 
sions.    The  members  of  the  churches  had  inherited 
their  religious  opinions  from  the  fathers  of  an  earlier 
period,  and  held  them  sincerely  without  a  suspicion 
that  they  could  be  controverted.     They  received  the 
Bible  in  the  common  version,  as  their  creed,  and 
read  it,  mainly  to  be  comforted  by  its  promises,  and 
guided  by  its  precepts,  not  doubting  that  all  their 
doctrinal  views  were  clearly  contained  in  it.     It  were 
useless  to  maintain  that  the  Baptists  were  faultless 
in  the  controversy.     They  sinned  far  less  than  they 
were  sinned  against,  but  they  were  not  without  sin. 
They   sometimes  judged  when   they  should   have 
investigated,   condemned  when   they  should  have 
debated,  resorted  to  the  exercise  of  authority  when 
they  should  have  used  kind  persuasion,  and  failed 
to  distinguish  between  the  factious  and  the  misled. 
In  the  year  1832,  events  were  drawing  to  a  crisis 
in  the  Baptist  denomination  in  Virginia  and  some 
of  the  Western  States.     A  party  had  been  formed 
in  the  churches,  r^sitectable  for  Jtheir  number,  and 


88  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS    lORMATION. 

quite  formidable  by  the  aggressive  spirit  whicli 
actuated  tjtwSm.  They  adopted  the  peculiar  senti- 
ments and  practices  advocated  by  Mr.  Campbell  in 
the  Christian  Baptist,  and  its  successor,  the  Millen- 
nial Harbinger.  They  styled  themselves  ReformerSy 
but  by  their  opponents,  they  were  styled  Camjphell- 
ites.  They  were  exceedingly  active  in  making  con- 
verts, and  in  numbering  and  marshalling  their 
forces.  In  this  state  of  things  it  was  impossible  but 
that  strife,  irritations,  alienations,  and  divisions  must 
ensue.  Mr.  Campbell  had  for  several  years  been 
sowing  the  seed  of  sectarianism,  and  now  he  was 
about  to  reap  the  harvest. 

What  was  to  be  done  in  this  crisis  ?  The  Re- 
formers, with  Mr.  Campbell  at  their  head,  were 
violently  opposed  to  separation  from  the  Baptists, 
and  were  ready,  to  a  man,  to  fight  for  peace.  It 
can  hardly  be  doubted  that  this  desire  of  union 
sprang  from  policy  rather  than  love.  They  were 
willing  to  remain  for  a  time  in  Babylon,  that  they 
might  extricate  others  from  its  smoke,  vassalage, 
and  degradation.  Knowing  themselves  to  be  in  a 
hopeless  minority,  they  were  desirous  to  be  permitted 
to  avail  themselves  of  Baptist  pulpits  and  presses 
for  the  propagation  of  their  principles.  But  a 
division  was  inevitable.  It  existed  in  fact — a  divi- 
sion in  sentiment,  affection,  interest,  and  aim — and 
it  only  remained  to  be  carried  out  in  form. 

Had  the  churchc^c  a  right  to  expel  the  Reformers  ? 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   FORMATION.  89 

The  power  of  expelling  factious  and  disorderly  mem- 
bers seems  to  be  indispensable  to  the  purity,  peace, 
and  prosperity  of  the  churches,  and  this  power  is 
distinctly  conferred  in  the  Scriptures.  "  Now,  I 
beseech  you,  brethren,  mark  them  which  cause  divi- 
sions and  offences  contrary  to  the  doctrine  which  ye 
have  learned  ;  and  avoid  them."  Rom  xvi.  27.  It 
is  true,  the  Reformers  maintained  that  their  teach- 
ings and  efforts  were  in  harmony  with  the  apostolic 
doctrine — indeed,  that  their  chief  object  was  to 
restore  that  long- lost  doctrine — but  Christ  had 
solemnly  devolved  on  the  churches  to  which  the 
innovators  belonged,  the  duty  of  deciding  these 
points.  Their  decision  might  be  wise  or  unwise — 
might  be  dictated  by  sectarian  bigotry,  or  an  honest 
and  enlightened  regard  to  truth — but  on  them  de- 
volved, by  divine  appointment,  the  duty  and  respon- 
sibility of  making  it  ;  and  from  their  decision  there 
was,  according  to  their  established  polity — a  polity 
approved  by  the  Reformers — no  appeal.  That 
there  are  occasions  which  call  for  the  exercise  of 
this  right  on  the  part  of  churches,  none  can  deny. 
Members  may  adopt  principles  so  utterly  at  war 
with  the  Gospel,  evince  a  sj)irit  so  repugnant  to  the 
spirit  of  Christ,  and  pursue  a  course  so  manifestly 
factious  and  schismatic,  as  to  leave  no  doubt  of  the 
propriety  of  their  expulsion  from  church  fellowship. 
Whether  the  churches  should  exercise  their  au- 
thority in  patting  the  Reforme  s  out  of  their  commu- 


90  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS    FORMATION. 

nion,  was  a  question  environed  with  difficulties — a 
question  involving  alike  the  rights  of  individuals 
and  of  churches — the  maintenance  of  truth  and 
order — and  the  prosperity  of  the  Kedeemer's  cause. 
There  were  grave  and  weightv  reasons  against  the 
separation.  A  schism  in  the  churches  was  greatly 
to  be  deprecated.  Many  of  the  Reformers  were  good 
men — converted  and  trained  up  among  the  Baptists 
— adopting  Mr.  Campbell's  views  only  in  part,  and 
imbibing  his  spirit  in  widely  diiferent  measures— 
from  whom  it  was  painful  to  separate.  A  division 
could  not  take  place  without  giving  rise  to  perplex- 
ing questions  concerning  the  righ't  of  property,  and 
greatly  increasing  the  strife  and  irritation  already 
prevailing,  to  the  mortification  of  the  godly,*and  the 
reproach  of  Christianity.  To  these  considerations 
must  be  added,  that  however  sound  the  reasons  for 
their  exclusion,  the  Eeformers  would  not  fail,  by  the 
cry  of  persecution,  to  enlist  the  sympathies  of  a  party 
in  their  favor,  and  to  bring  odium  on  their  opposers. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  reasons  for  a  separation  were 
overwhelming.  In  many  churches,  the  parties  had 
taken  their  grounds,  and  in  the  constant,  earnest, 
and  painful  strife  about  the  Eeformation,  the  true 
ends  of  church  fellowship  were  almost  forgotten 
TheReformed ministers  were  zealous  in  disseminating 
their  principles  in  all  the  churches  to  which  they 
could  gain  access,  and  baptizing  into  their  new  faith 
such  Converts  as  they  could  find  or  make,  not  only 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    FORMATION.  91 

in  their,  own  congregations,  but  in  those  of  non- 
Reforming  pastors.  Meetings  of  the  Reformers  were 
called  and  held  to  promote  the  interests  of  the 
Reformation.  With  this  Reformation  the  Baptists 
had  no  sympathy,  believing  it  to  be  pugnacious  in 
spirit,  unsound  in  theory,  and  barren  in  the  fruits 
of  piety.  It  was  utterly  impossible  that  parties,  so 
discordant  in  views,  so  alienated  in  aifection,  and  of 
such  opposite  aims,  should  dwell  together  in  unity. 
To  perpetuate  the  union,  under  such  circumstances, 
was  to  perpetuate  strife,  and  heart-burnings,  and 
entail  on  the  churches  inefficiency  and  ruin.  More- 
over, the  principles  advocated  by  the  Reformers, 
were  deemed  by  the  Baptists  to  be,  not  only  erro- 
neous, but  of  pernicious  influence,  and  such  as  they 
could  not  countenance  without  recreancy  to  the 
cause  of  Christ. 

It  is  not  proposed  to  furnish  a  history  of  the 
painful  separation  which  took  place  between  the 
Reformers  and  Baptists  in  several  of  the  Southern, 
and  most  of  the  Western  States.  The  details  of 
the  event  would  fill  a  large  volume.  Every  asso- 
ciation and  every  church  infected  with  Campbellism 
has  its  peculiar  history.  The  conflict  was,  in  many 
respects,  everywhere  the  same — maintained  with  the 
same  spirit,  carried  on  with  the  same  weapons,  and 
producing  the  same  residts,  differing,  however, 
widely  in  degree — its  details  being  in  no  two  places 
the  same.     Here   4ie  hottest  contest  was  in   the 


92  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    FORMATION. 

association — there  in  the  churches  ;  here  the  Bap- 
tists were  in  the  majority,  ejecting  the  Reformers, 
and  retaining  possession  of  the  property— there  the 
Reformers  were  in  the  ascendant,  and  the  Baptists 
under  the  necessity  of  relinquishing  their  interest  in 
the  property,  and  withdrawing  from  the  communion 
of  the  Reformers  ;  here  the  hattle  was  fierce,  and 
the  separation  was  attended  with  painful  exaspera- 
tion— there  mild  counsel  j)revailed,  and  the  division 
..  occurred  in  a  gentler  and  more  forbearing  spirit, 
■"•  .  '  As  a  specimen  of  the  course  pursued  by  other 
f^  bodies,  I  will  give  a  sketch  of  the  action  of  the 
Dover  Association — then  the  largest  association  of 
Baptists  in  the  world — in  regard  to  Campbellisra  ; 
and  I  select  this  because  I  happen  to  be  best' 
acquainted  with  it.  In  the  autumn  of  1832,  this 
body  convened  at  Four-Mile  Creek  meeting-house, 
in  Henrico  County,  Va.,  not  far  from  the  city  of 
Richmond,  The  Reformation  excitement  had  reach- 
ed its  height.  Several  of  the  churches  belonging  to 
the  body  had  been  split  asunder,  and  others  were 
in  a  distracted  and  unhappy  condition.  All  eyes 
were  turned  to  the  Association  for  advice  in  this 
time  of  trial.  The  judicious  and  venerable  R.  B. 
Semple,  so  long  the  Moderator  of  the  Association, 
was  absent,  having  recently  been  called  to  his  reward. 
The  subject  which  had  caused  such  painful  anxiety, 
was  referred  to  a  select,  committee,  consisting  of 
Elders  John  Kerr,  Tames  B.  Taylor,  Peter  Ainslie, 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS    FtRMATION.  93 

J.  B,  Jeter,  and  Philip  Montague.  The  committee 
in  due  time  made  the  following  report : 

"  The  select  committee  appointed  to  consider  and 
report  '  what  ought  to  be  done  in  reference  to  the 
aew  doctrines  and  practices  which  have  disturbed 
•he  peace  and  harmony  of  some  of  the  churches 
v^omposing  this  association/  met  at  the  house  of 
Elder  Miles  Turpin,  and  having  invited,  and 
obtained  the  aid  and  counsel  of  Elders  Andrew 
Broaddus,  Eli  Ball,  John  Micou,  William  Hill, 
Miles  Turpin,  and  brother  Erastus  T,  Montague, 
after  due  deliberation,  respectfully  report  the  fol- 
lowing preamble  and  resolution  for  the  considera- 
tion and  adoption  of  the  association. 

"  This  association  having  been  from  its  origin, 
blessed  with  uninterrupted  harmony,  and  a  high 
degree  of  religious  prosperity,  has  seen  with  un- 
speakable regret,  within  a  few  years  past,  the  spirit 
of  sj)eculation,  controversy  and  strife,  growing  up 
among  some  of  the  ministers  and  churches  within 
its  bounds.  This  unhappy  state  of  things  has  evi- 
dently been  produced  by  the  preaching,  and  writ- 
ings of  Alexander  Campbell,  and  his  adherents. 
After  having  deliberately  and  prayerfully  examined 
the  doctrines  held,  and  propagated  by  them,  and 
waited  long  to  witness  their  practical  influence  on 
the  churches,  and  upon  society  in  general,  we  are 
thoroughly  convinced  that  they  are  doctrines  not  ac- 
cording to  godline-s,  but  subversive  of  the  true 


94  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   FORMATION, 

spirit  of  the  Grospel  of  Jesus  Christ — disorganizing 
and  demoralizing  in  their  tendency  ;  and,  therefore, 
ought  to  be  disavowed  and  resisted,  by  all  the 
lovers  of  truth  and  sound  piety. 

"It  is  needless  to  specify,  and  refute  the  errors 
held  and  taught  by  them  ;  this  has  been  often  done, 
and  as  often  have  the  doctrines,  quoted  from  their 
writings,  been  denied,  with  the  declaration  that  they 
have  been  misrepresented  or  misunderstood.  If* 
after  more  than  seven  years'  investigation,  the  most 
pious  and  intelligent  men  in  the  land  are  unable  to 
understand  what  thev  speak  and  write,  it  surely  is 
an  evidence  of  some  radical  defect  in  the  things 
taught,  or  in  the  mode  of  teaching  them.  Their 
views  of  sin,  faith,  repentance,  regeneration,  bap- 
tism, the  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  church  govern-, 
ment,  the  Christian  ministry,  and  the  whole  scheme 
of  Christian  'benevolence,  are,  we  believe,  contrary 
to  the  plain  letter  and  spirit  of  the  New  Testament 
of  our  Lord  and  Saviour. 

"  By  their  practical  influence,  churches  long  bless- 
ed with  peace  and  prosperity,  have  been  thrown  into 
wrangling  and  discord — principles  long  held  sacred 
by  the  best  and  most  enlightened  men  that  ever 
lived  or  died,  are  villtfied  and  ridiculed  as  ^  school 
divinity,'  '  sectarian  dogmas,'  &c.  Ministers,  who 
have  counted  all  things  but  loss,  for  the  excellency 
of  the  knowledge  of  Christ  Jesus,  are  reprobated, 
and  denounced    as    '  visionary    dreamers/    '  mysti- 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS   FOBMATIOX.  95 

fiers,'  '  blind  leaders  of  the  blind/  '  liireling 
priests/  &c.,  &c.  The  church  in  which  many  ot 
them  live,  and  from  which  they  call  it  persecution 
to  be  separated,  is  held  up  to  public  scorp  as 
*  Babylon  the  mother  of  harlots,  and  abominations 
of  the  earth.'  The  most  opprobrious  epithets  are 
unsparingly  applied  to  principles  which  we  think 
clearly  taught  in  the  Word  of  God,  and  which  we 
hold  dear  to  our  hearts.  While  they  arrogate  to 
themselves  the  title  of  '  Reformers,'  it  is  lament- 
ably evident,  that  no  sect  in  Christendom  needs  re- 
formation more  than  they  do. 

"  While  they  boast  of  superior  light  and  know- 
ledge, we  cannot  but  lament,  in  their  life  and  con- 
versation, the  absence  of  that  '  wisdom  that  is  from 
above,  which  is  first  pure,  then  peaceable,  gentle, 
and  easy  to  be  entreated,  full  of  mercy  and  good 
fruits,  without  partiality,  and  without  hypocrisy.' 
In  fine,  the  writings  of  Alexander  Campbell,  and 
the  spirit  and  manner  of  those  who  profess  to 
admire  his  writings  and  sentiments,  appear  to  us 
remarkably  destitute  of  '  the  mind  that  was  in 
Christ  Jesus/  of  that  divine  lore  '  which  sufi'ereth 
long,  and  is  kind,  envieth  not,  vaunteth  not  itself, 
is  not  puffed  up,  doth  not  behave  itself  unseemly, 
seeketh  not  her  own,  is  not  easily  provoked,  think- 
eth  no  evil.'  Wherever  these  writings  and  senti- 
ments have  to  any  extent,  been  introduced  into  our 
churches,  the  6i)irit  of  hypercriticism,  *  vain  jang- 


96  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS   FORMATION. 

lings  and  strife  about  words  to  no  profit,  but  to  the 
subverting,  of  the  hearers/  have  chilled  the  spirit 
of  true  devotion,  and  put  an  end  to  Christian  be- 
nevolence and  harmony. 

"  If  the  opprobrious  epithets,  and  bitter  denunci 
ations,  so  liberally  heaped  upon  us  by  Mr,  Camp- 
bell and  his  followers,  are  deserved,  they  as  pious 
and  honorable  men  can  not  desire  to  live  in  commu- 
nion with  us  ;  and  if.  they  are  undeserved,  and  de- 
signedly slanderous,  this  of  itself  would  forbid  our 
holding  them  in  Christian  fellowship.  If,  indeed, 
they  have  found  the  long  lost  key  of  knowledge, 
and  are  the  only  persons,  since  the  days  of  the 
apostles,  who  have  entered  and  explored  the  divine 
arcanum,  it  is  due  to  themselves — to  purblind 
Christendom — to  the  world — to  truth — to  God,  that 
they  should,  in  obedience  to  the  divine  command, 
clothed  in  the  shining  garments  of  truth  and  right- 
eousness, walk  out  of  '  Babylon,'  and  concentrating 
their  light,  exhibit  a  true  sample  of  the  '  ancient 
order  of  things  ;'  and  diffuse  around  them  a  blaze 
of  'love,  joy,  peace,  long-suffering,  gentleness, 
goodness,  faith,  meekness,  temperance.'  Until 
they  do  this,  grave  and  thinking  men  will  doubt 
their  high  pretentions,  for  'by  their  fruits  ye 
shall  know  them.'  It  w^ould  seem  that  conscientious, 
unobtrusive,  holy  men,  whose  hearts  are  sickened 
with  the  depravity  of  the  times,  and  who  mourn  a 
sad  and  general  departure  from  truth  and  holiness, 


CAM^BELLISM   IN   ITS   FORMATICN.  97 

would  voluntarily  come  out  from  '  the  present  cor- 
rupt order  of  things/  and  holding  sweet  commu- 
nion "with  one  another,  and  with  their  God,  let  their 
light  so  shine  that  others  seeing  their  good  works, 
might  be  induced  to  glorify  their  Father  in  heaven  ; 
but,  alas  !  they  appear  to  be  a  strange  anti-secta- 
rian, dogmatical  sect,  who  live  only  in  the  fire  of 
strife  and  controversy,  and  seek  to  remain  in  con- 
nexion with  the  existing  churches,  that  they  may 
with  the  greater  facility  obtain  materials  for  feeding 
the  disastrous  flame, 

"In  every  aspect  of  the  case  then,  a  separation  is 
indispensably  necessary.  The  cause  of  truth  and 
righteousness  requires  it — the  best  interests  of  all 
the  parties  concerned  demand  it. 

"  We,  therefore,  the  assembled  ministers,  and  dele- 
gates of  the  Dover  Association,  after  much  prayer- 
ful deliberation,  do  hereby  affectionately  recommend 
to  the  churches  in  our  connection,  to  separate  from 
their  communion  all  such  persons  as  are  promoting 
controversy  and  discord,  under  the  specious  name 
of  '  Refonners.'  That  the  line  of  distinction  may 
be  clearly  drawn,  so  that  all  who  are  concerned  may 
understand  it,  we  feel  it  our  duty  to  declare,  that 
whereas  Peter  Ainslie,  John  Du  Val,  Mathew  W. 
Webber,  Thos.  M.  Henley,  John  Richards,  and 
Dudley  Atkinson,  ministers  within  the  bounds  of 
this  Association,  have  voluntarily  assumed  the  name 
of  '  Reformers,'  in  its  party  application,  by  attend- 


98  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS   FORMATiON, 

ing  a  meeting  publicly  advertised  for  that  party  j 
and  by  communing  with,  and  otherwise  promoting 
the  views  of  the  members  of  that  party,  who  have 
been  separated  from  the  fellowship  and  communion 
of  regular  Baptist  churches — therefore 

"  Resolved,  That  this  Association  cannot  consist- 
ently, and  conscientiously  receive  them,  nor  any 
other  ministers  maintaining  their  views,  as  members 
of  their  body  ;  nor  can  they  in  future  act  in  concert 
with  any  church,  or  churches,  that  may  encourage 
or  countenance  their  ministrations/' 

This  preamble  and  resolution,  prepared  by  Eldei 
John  Kerr,  pastor  of  the  "First  Baptist  church  iij 
the  city  of  Richmond,  was  approved  by  all  the  mem- 
bers of  the  committee,  excepting  Mr.  Ainslie,  who 
•was  a  Reformed  preacher,  and  named  among  those, 
whose  excision  was  proposed  by  the  report,  and 
also  by  all  the  brethren  whose  counsel  was  sought 
by  the  committee.  The  report  was  adopted  by  the 
association,  without  discussion,  and  with  few  dis- 
sentients. The  delegates  had  been  selected  and 
sent  to  the  meeting  for  the  purpose  of  adopting,  if 
practicable,  effective  measures  for  allaying  the  per- 
nicious excitement  in  the  churches  and  were  pre- 
pared to  act  promptly  and  decidedlj  Their  action, 
whether  wise  or  unwise,  was  adopted  after  careful 
deliberation,  earnest  prayer  for  divine  guidance,  and 
with  much  anxiety  for  its  result,  and  it  received  the 
cordial  approbation  of  the  churches. 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   FORMATION.  99 

It  was  not  to  be  expected  that  the  decision  of  the 
association  would  be  acceptable  to  Mr.  Campbell, 
and  the  Keformers.  They  \dewed  themselves  as  the 
objects  of  a  most  unchristian  and  cruel  persecution. 
Mr.  Campbell  stigmatized  the  report,  adopted  by 
the  association,  as  the  "  Dover  Decree,"  and  thus 
discoursed  of  it  in  the  Millennial  Harbinger,  Vol. 
3,  page  573. 

"^hat  a  dangerous  matter  it  has  become,  to 
think  differently  fVom  Messrs.  Kerr,  Ball,  Broaddus, 
and  Erastus  Montague  !  How  perilous  to  view  sin, 
faith,  baptism,  &c.,  differently  from  these  '  keepers 
of  the  faith'  of  Virginia.  This  alone  exposes  a  per- 
son to  the  greatest  anathema  in  the  power  of  Vir- 
ginia Baptists.  They  can  do  no  more  in  Virginia, 
as  yet,  than  treat  a  dissentient  as  they  would  a 
murderer,  or  a  vile  adulterer.  The  committee  or 
managers  of  the  hull  of  excommunication,  can  neither 
banish,  burn,  nor  imprison  those  who  differ  from 
their  views  of  sin,  faith,  and  baptism.  There  is  no 
Patmos,  jail,  or  pillory  knovra  in  Virginia  law,  for 
those  who  think  differently  from  John  Kerr  or  Eli 
Ball,  But  they  can  place  Peter  Ainslie,  John  Du 
Val,  M.  B.  Webber,  T.  M.  Henley,  John  Richards, 
and  Dudley  Atkinson  in  the  same  society,  as  re- 
spects the  Lord's  table,  with  all  the  inmates  of  the 
penitentiary,  now  under  the  care  of  my  friend  Col. 
C.  S.  Morgan  ;  yes,  they  can  tell  all  the  sects  in 
Virginia,  that  th^y  view  these  virtuous  and  exem- 


100  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   FORMATION. 

plary  men  as  unfit  for  the  communion  of  Eli  Ball 
and  John  Kerr,  as  were  the  infamous  actors  in  the 
Southampton  insurrection.  We  ask  what  difierence 
have  they  made  ?  What  more  could  they  do  than 
exclude  such  from  the  kingdom  of  heaven  ?  and  do 
they  not  teach  that  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  theirs  ? 
If  they  think  that  what  they  have  bound  on  earth 
is  bound  in  heaven,  where  stand  these  anathema- 
tized preachers  .^  Are  they  blotted  out  of  the  book 
of  life  .?  But  perhaps  they  will  say,  that  what  they 
have  loosed  on  earth  in  the  house  of  Miles  Turpin, 
is  not  loosed  in  heaven  !  Nor  can  they  pray  to  the 
Lord  to  ratify  in  heaven  what  they  have  done  on 
earth  !  What  a  farce  this  is !  And  how  will  they 
answer  to  the  Lord  for  casting  out  of  his  church  on 
earth  (as  they  call  the  Dover  Association)  those 
whom  they  have  every  reason  to  think  are  esteemed 
.i»&  much  the  children  of  God  as  themselves .?" 
:■  Maby  other  things  of  like  spirit  and  quality  did 
Mr.  Campbell  pen  and  publish  ;  and  his  adherents 
echoed  and  re-echoed  his  denunciations  of  the  Dover 
Association,  with  most  vehement  zeal.  Had  they  been 
fined,  imprisoned,  scourged,  outlawed,  branded,  and 
exposed  to  a  terrible  martyrdom,  they  could  not  have 
made  a  greater  -outcry  against  their  shameless  and 
cruel  persecutions,  than  they  did  for  being  put  out  of 
the  eommunion  of  churches,  which,  in  the  ardor  of 
their '2^al  forKeform'^tion,they  had  often  pronounced 
to  Ixei":  priest-ridden,  corrupt,  and  in  Babylon.     They 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS    FORMATION.  101 

gloried  in  being,  as  they  supposed,  martyrs  in  tlie 
cause  of  trutli  and  rigliteousness.  Thus  writes  one 
of  the  excinded  preachers — 

"  The  long  agony  is  over.  The  Dover  Association 
has  assumed  the  awful  responsibility  of  producing  a 
faction  ;  consequently,  a  sect.  We  feel  much  re- 
lieved as  respects  ourselves.  Only  three  or  four  of 
the  Keformers -attended  the  Association,  as  we  had 
no  objection  to  being  a  separate  people,  if  the  Bap- 
lists  were  resolved  on  taking  to  themselves  this  act 
of  rebellion  against  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord.  I  ven- 
ture to  say,  no  intelligent  friend  of  Reform  is  dis- 
pleased with  it.  For  myself,  I  feel  highly  honored 
in  being  made  the  first  martyr  in  old  Virginia  in 
the  present  Beformation.  My  Christian  character 
has  been  gibbeted  (though  yet  I  live)  for  adhering 
to  the  sayings  and  doings  of  Jesus  Christ  and  his 
apostles.  Philip  Montague  has  conferred,  this  honor 
upon  me.  It  is  the  highest  I  ever  expect  to  enjoy 
in  time — worth  all  the  D.D.'s  that  ever  were  issued 
from  all  tlie  seminaries  in  the  world."  Mill.  Har., 
vol.  4,  p.  13. 

More  than  twenty  years  have  passed  since  the 
Dover  Association  adopted  the  report  of  its  com- 
mittee condemning  Campbcllism.  Let  us  now 
endeavor  to  take  a  calm  and  candid  review  of  the 
measure.  The  report  contained  some  unguarded 
and  unnecessarily  liarsh  expressions.  Its  author, 
wliosc  temperament  was  naturally  ardent,  had  been 


y 


102         '     CAMPBJLLISM    IN    ITS   FORMATION. 

greatl}'  annoyed  and  excited  by  tlie  pievalence  of 
Mr.  Campbell's  peculiar  vi^ws  in  the  cburcli  of 
whicb  he  was  pastor,  £(©jd  the  secession  of  a  large 
and  respectable  party  ti'dopting  them,  from  the  main 
body.  The  report  was  evidently  written  nnder  the 
influence  of  \)s^s  excitement  ;  and  the  committee 
and  the  Ag^ociation  partook  too  much  of  the  same 
feeling,  to  scan  the  document  with  severity.  The 
doctrines  taught  by  Mr.  Campbell  were  declared  to 
be  "  demoralizing  in  their  tendency  ;"  and  of  the 
party  embracing  them,  it  was  affirmed  that  "  no  sect 
in  Christendom  needed  reformation  more  than  they." 
On  calm  reflection,  these  expressions  were  generally 
admitted  to  be  u  ajust.  Whatever  may  be  the  ulti- 
mate influence  cf  Campbelhsm  on  piety  and  morals, 
it  must  be  cod  jeded,  that  it  gives  no  countenance 
to  immorality.  And  while  it  can  hardly  be  denied 
that  the  partj  embracing  the  system  needed  reforma- 
tion, it  is  but  fair  to  admit  that  there  are  Cliristian 
sects  which  need  it  "  more  than  they."  These  ex- 
pressions were  subsequently  expunged  or  modified 
by  the  Association.  The  amiable  and  clear-headed 
Moderator  of  the  Association,  the  Eev.  A.  Broaddus,  • 
who  undertook  the  vindication  of  the  report  from 
what  he  deemed  the  "  unfair  representation"  of  it 
by  Mr.  Campbell,  made  the  following  admission — 
"  In  the  report  of  the  committee,  (drafted  by  the 
chairman)  there  are  some  few  expressions  which,  in 
my  view,  might  have  been  advantageously  omitted 


CAMPBELLISM  IN  ITS  FORMATION.      103 

or  exchanged  for  others  ;  the  instrument  might  thus 
have  retained  all  its  force,  without  any  tinge  of 
acrimony  or  harshness." 

Let  us  now  examine  the  other  side  of  the  case. 
Mr.  Campbell  and  his  friends  maintained  that  the 
Association  in  its  action  not  only  transgressed  the 
law  of  Christ,  infringed  the  religious  liberty  of  indi- 
viduals, and  were  guilty  of  flagrant  persecution,  but 
plainly  transcended  its  constitutional  authority.  It 
had  no  right,  it  must  be  conceded,  to  interfere  in 
the  government  or  discipline  of  the  churches.  It 
was  simply  an  advisory  council.  It  possessed  the 
unquestioned  and  unquestionable  right  of  advising 
thq  churches  in  all  matters  pertaining  to  their  peace 
and  prosperity.  This  right  the  members  of  the 
Association  exercised,  in  an  important  matter,  to 
the  best  of  their  judgment,  and  at  the  earnest  re- 
quest of  the  churches.  They  did  not  counsel  hastily, 
nor  without  deliberation,  nor  without  a  deep  sense 
of  their  responsibility  to  Christ,  nor  without  prayer 
for  divino  guidance.  Their  advice  was  in  the  follow- 
ing words — "  We,  therefore,  the  assembled  minis- 
ters and  delegates,  of  the  Dover  Association,  after 
much  prayerful  deliberation,  do  hereby  affectionately 
recommend  to  the  churches  in  our  connection,  to 
separate  from  their  communion,  all  such  persons  as 
are  promoting  controversy  and  discord,  under  the 
sjjecious  name  of  Reformers."  They  might  err  in 
the  counsel  which  they  gave,  but  so  might  their 


.X" 


104  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    FORMATION, 

Opponents  in  judging  of  it.  The  churches  might 
receive  or  reject  their  advice  at  pleasure.  The 
Association  had  no  power  to  enforce  its  counsel, 
except  moral  power.  Thus  far  its  action  certainly 
did  not  exceed  the  limit  of  its  admitted  authority. 
But  the  ministers  and  delegates  of  the  Association 
declared  that  they  could  not  "  consistently  and  con- 
scientiously receive"  certain  individuals  named,  "  or 
any  other  ministers  maiutaiaing  their  views,  as  mem- 
bers of  their  body."  The  Association  had  the  admit- 
ted authority,  for  such  reasons  as  they  deemed  valid, 
to  expel  a  church  from  the  body.  In  naming  certain 
ministers,  with  whom  in  future  they  could  not  con- 
sent to  co-operate,  they  did  not  exclude  them  from  the 
churches  of  which  they  were  respectively  members, 
nor  interfere  with  the  discipline  of  those  churches  ; 
but  simply  announced  to  the  churches,  that  believ- 
ing these  ministers  to  be  unsound  in  doctrine,  and 
their  labors  and  influence  subversive  of  the  harmony 
and  prosperity  of  the  churches,  they  would  exercise 
their  constitutional  authority  in  excluding  from  their 
fellowship  such  churches  as  should  continue  to 
"  countenance  their  ministrations."  The  design  of 
the  Association  was  to  draw  clearly  ''a  line  of  dis- 
tinction" between  themselves  and  the  Eeformers  ; 
and  the  measure  adopted  was  admirably  suited  to 
secure  the  object.  In  a  very  short  time,  and  with 
less  irritation  than  for  several  years  had  been  exist- 
ing, the  parties  were  clearly  separated. 


CAMPBELLISM    IN   ITS    FOEMATION.  105 

It  is  proper  to  permit  Eev.  A.  Broaddus,  the 
most  logical  and  formidable  of  Mr.  Campbell's  op- 
ponents, and  one  of  the  mildest  and  most  courteous 
of  controversialists,  to  vindicate  the  action  of  the 
Association,  from  the  unfair  representations,  and 
severe  animadversions  contained  in  the  Millennial 
Harbinger. 

"  But  to  the  more  particular  object  of  this  com- 
munication— the  light  in  which  Mr.  Campbell  has 
endeavored  to  place  the  conduct  of  the  Association, 
in  adopting  this  measure.  ^Let  us  hear  him.  '  They 
can  do  nothing  more  in  Virginia,  as  yet,  than  treat 
a  dissentient  as  they  would  a  murderer  or  a  \dle 
adulterer.  The  committee,  or  managers  of  the  bull 
of  excommunication,  can  neither  banish,  burn,  nor 
imprison  those  who  differ  from  their  views  of  sin, 
faith,  and  baptism.  There  is  no  Patmos,  jail,  or 
pillory,  known  in  Virginia  law,  for  those  who  think 
differently,'  &c. 

"  Now,  I  really  should  wonder,  if  it  were  not  that 
something  similar  had  been  intimated  at  other 
times — I  really  should  wonder — yea,  and  still  I 
cannot  help  wondering— that  Mr.  Campbell  did  not 
think  this  beneath  him  !  this  politic  resort — this 
most  unfair  and  injurious  attempt  to  enlist  the 
prejudices  of  his  readers  against  the  Association,  by 
charging  them,  as  he  obviously  does,  by  implication, 
«vith  a  disposition  to  persecute  those  who  differ  from 
them; — to  p«rsecute  theih  even  tc  imprisonment, 


106  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS    FORMATION. 

to  exile,  and  to  deatli ; — restrained  only  by  the  want 
of  power  from  inflicting  these  punishments  !  Such 
is  the  construction  which  every  candid  and  intelli- 
gent reader  must  put  on  his  expressions  ;  and  on 
every  candid  and  intelligent  reader,  I  now  call,  to 
judge  of  the  force  and  validity  of  this  charge. 

"  What  is  the  ground  of  this  charge  ?  Why,  the 
Association  has  cut  off  '  these  virtuous  and  exem- 
plary men'  from  fellowship  in  our  body  :  ergo,  the 
Association  would  imprison,  banish,  or  burn  them, 
if  the  power'were  not  "Vijanting  !  This  then  is  the 
position  which  arises  from  such  reasoning  : — A  de- 
claration of  non-fellowship  is  sufficient  proof  of  a 
disposition  to  imprison,  banish  or  kill !  This,  I  say, 
is  the  position  resulting  from  a  charge  established  on 
such  ground  ;  and  on  the  same  ground,  no  ingenuity 
of  man  can  fairly  make  out,  how  the  act  of  exclusion 
can  be  performed  by  a  church,  without  incurring 
the  same  charge.  The  principle  assumed  is  the 
same  in  every  case,  and  thus,  when  we  exclude 
from  fellowship,  we  do  of  course  give  evidence  of  a 
disposition  to  imprison,  to  banish,  to  burn  ;  and 
then,  to  sanction  exclusion  from  fellowship,  is,  in 
effect,  to  sanction  the  popish  excommunication, — 
where  the  thunders  of  the  Vatican  are  hurled  at  the 
head  of  the  devoted  victim,  and  temporal  pains  and 
punishments  are  inflicted  on  him. 

"  But  I  have  onQ  more  argument  on  this  case — the 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   FORMATION.  107 

argumentum  ad  hominem — or  an  argument  applying 
to  the  assailant's  own  views.     Eeader,  attend  ! 

"  Let  us  view  tlie  charge  against  the  Association, 
They  have  gone  as  far  as  they  could  go.  What 
then  ?  Why,  they  would  go  much  farther,  it  seems, 
if  they  had  power.  '  The  committee,  or  managers 
of  the  bull  of  excommunication,  can  neither  banish, 
burn,  nor  imprison  those  who  differ  from  their  views 
of  sin,  faith,  and  baptism :'  which  amounts  to  this : 
The  Dover  Association  has  passed  a  resolution  of 
non-fellowship  with  the  people  called  '  Keformers ;' 
and  therefore  would  imprison,  banish  or  burn  them, 
if  they  had  the  power.  Now,  mark  well,  I  beseech 
you,  reader,  and  see  if  the  argument  does  not  come 
home  to  Mr.  Campbell  in  all  its  force.  Mr.  Campbell 
(be  it  remembered)  is  not  an  open  communionist. 
Well ;  Mr.  Campbell  passed  a  resolution  of  noa- 
fellowship  with  all  Paedo-baptists  :  he  has  gone  as 
far  as  he  can  ;  and  therefore — what  shall  I  say  ? — 
he  has  given  evidence  that  he  would  imprison, 
banish,  or  burn  them,  if  he  had  the  power.  '  But 
I  don't  believe  it,'  you  say.  Neither  do  I ; — far 
from  it !  But  is  not  the  argumentum  ad  hominem 
fairly  applied  ?  What  a  pity  it  is  that  my  friend 
could  not  have  had  charity  enough  to  believe  the 
committee,  or  the  Association,  might  declare  non- 
fellowship  with  people,  whom  they  would  neither 
burn,  banish,  nor  imprison  ;  nor  indeed  injure  in 
iny  way  whatever." 


108  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   FOEMATION'. 

It  is  but  justice  to  Mr.  Campbell  to  note  that  in 
replying  to  tbis  spirited  vindication  of  the  exscind- 
ing act  of  the  Association,  (of  which  only  a  part  has 
been  quoted,)  he  felt  constrained  to  disavow  the 
consequence  so  logically  deduced  by  Mr.  Broaddus 
from  the  expressions  in  the  Millennial  Harbinger. 
■'  In  one  word,"  said  he,  "  I  do  not  think  that  any 
■)f  the  Virginia  Baptists  would  burn  myself  or  breth- 
ren ;  but  unless  they  would  burn,  or  banish,  or 
otherwise  inflict  civil  penalties  upon  us,  what  more 
can  they  do  than  what  they  have  done  ?"  And,  it 
may  be  asked,  with  equal  pertinency,  believing  that 
the  peace  and  prosperity  of  the  churches  demanded 
the  exclusion  of  the  Kcformers  from  their  fellowship, 
whsit  less  could  they  have  done  than  they  did  do  ? 
They  condemned  the  principles,  and  deplored  the 
mischievous  effects  of  the  so-called  "  Eeforma- 
tion,"  and  aimed,  with  as  little  irritation  as  possible, 
to  produce  the  desired  separation  ;  but  carefully 
abstained  from  any  imputation  on  the  moral  char- 
acter of  the  Reformers.  If  a  few  unguarded  and 
acrimonious  expressions  escaped  them,  they  might 
surely  find  an  apology,  if  not  a  justification,  in  "the 
spirit  that  breathes,  and  words  that  burn"  in  the 
pages  of  the  Christian  Baptist  and  Millennial  Har- 
binger. 

Not  long  since  a  member  was  excluded  from  a 
Baptist  church.  He  was  a  man  of  irreproachable 
moral  character,  but,  ha\'ing  become  a  Spiritualist, 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    FORMATION.  109 

as  the  believers  in  spirit  rappings  are  called,  lie  de- 
nied the  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures,  human  de- 
pravity, the  divinity  and  atonement  of  Christ — in 
fine,  all  the  distinctive  principles  of  the  Gospel. 
He  claimed  to  be  judged  not  by  his  opinions,  but  his 
works.  "  Not  opinions,  but  deeds,"  he  insisted, 
**-8hould  be  the  great  test  of  character."  Yet,  he 
was  expelled,  and  most  righteously,  &om  the  fellow- 
ship of  the  church.  Now,  on  the  principle  adopted 
by  Mr.  Campbell,  this  was  rank  persecution. 
"  What  a  dangerous  matter,"  the  Spiritualist  might 
plausibly,  and  in  the  language  of  Mr.  Campbell, 
say,  it  is  "  to  think  differently  from"  the  church. 
"  Liberty,  religious  liberty,  that  liberty  which  alone 
deserves  the  name,  .  .  .  has  expired  in"  it.  "  They 
can  do  no  more  .  .  as  yet  than  treat  a  dissentient  as 
they  would  a  murderer  or  a  vile  adulterer.  They 
can  place  '  me'  in  the  same  society,  as  respects  the 
Lord's  table,  with  all  the  inmates  of  the  peniten- 
tiary ;  ....  yes,  they  can  tell  all  the  sects  .  .  .  that 
they  view"  me,  though  "  virtuous  and  exemplary, 
.  .  as  unfit  for"  their  "  communion  as  the  infamous 
actors  in  the  Southampton  insurrection."  Mill. 
Har.,  Vol.  3,  p.  573. 

The  separation,  though  painful  at  first,  after- 
wards tended  to  diminish  the  evils  which  had 
sprung  from  the  controversy  and  strife  produced  by 
the  Reformation.  The  parted  combatants,  finding 
fewer  causes  of  exacerbation,  soon  began  to  lose  the 


110  CAiirKELLISM    IN    ITS   FORMATION. 

heat  and  \d(?fence  created  by  tlie  conflict.  The 
Dover  Association,  though  she  lost  several  churches, 
and  many  respectable  church  members,  continued 
her  almost  unimpeded  course  of  prosperity  and  use- 
fulness. Her  losses  were  soon  repaired  ;  and  even 
in  congregations  where  the  Keformation  seemed  to 
have  acquired  the  greatest  influence,  her  success 
was  not  long  delayed.  Meantime  the  Keformers 
enjoyed  a  privilege  which  without  the  separation 
they  could  not  have  enjoyed — the  privilege  of  illus- 
trating, by  the  loveliness  of  their  spirit,  the  fervor 
of  their  devotion,  the  sanctity  of  their  lives,  their 
elevation  above  the  world,  and  the  success  of  their 
ministrations,  the  superiority  of  the  "  ancient  Gos- 
pel" over  sectarian  dogmas  and  mystic  theology — 
of  the  "ancient  order  of  things"  over  the  corrup- 
tions of  Babylon — in  short,  the  real  value  of  that 
Reformation,  whose  pretensions  were  so  lofty,  whose 
spirit  was  so  warlike,  and  whose  influence  among 
the  sects  was  so  exciting  and  painful. 

Mr.  Campbell  now  found  himself  at  the  head  of 
a  sect — yes,  of  a  sect.  The  Eeformers  were  a 
Sect  according  to  the  definition  of  Noah  Webster  : 
— "  Sect — A  body  or  number  of  persons  united  in 
tenets,  chiefly  in  philosophy  and  religion,  but  con 
stituting  a  distinct  party  by  holding  sentiments 
difierent  from  those  of  other  men  ;  a  denomina- 
tion." Did  not  the  Eeformers  unite  in  maintaining 
certain  religious  tenets  ?    and  were  they  not  dip- 


OAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   FORMATION.'  Ill 

tinguished  by  these  sentiments  from  every  qiL 
party  ?  They  were  a  sect  in  the  Scripture 
of  the  term.  The  "word  "  sect/'  or  "  heresy' 
Greek  term  "  uipeatc"  is  rendered  in  th^ 
Testament,  signifies  a  party,  or  persons  cl 
and  maintaining  peculiar  opinions.  It  v.  as  among 
the  Jews,  not  a  term  of  reproach,  bHt  of  distinc- 
tion. They  called  Christians  a  "  sect,"  or  party  ; 
and  this  sect  they  knew  was  every  where  spoken 
against.  Acts  28  :  22.  It  must  be  added  that  the 
Reformers  were  a  "  sect"  in  the  sense  in  which  Mr. 
Campbell  so  frequently  employed  the  term.  They 
had  aU  the  attributes,  and,  eminently,  the  spirit  of 
a  sect.  Their  claim  to  be  considered  "  The  Church," 
and  by  eminence  "  The  Christian  Church,"  was  as 
baseless,  and  far  more  preposterous,  than  the  same 
claim  Tauntingly  set  forth  by  some  older  and  more 
venerable,  if  not  more  worthy,  sects.  Did  Christ 
have  no  church  on  earth  from  the  commencement 
of  the  Romish  apostacy  till  the  beginning  of  the 
"  current  Reformation  ?" 

Of  this  sect  Mr,  Campbell  was  the  head — not  by 
appointment,  nor  in  form,  but  in  fact,  and  by  merit. 
His  learning,  zeal,  energy  and  influence  clearly 
laarked  him  out  for  the  position ;  and  it  was  ac- 
corded to  him  without  dissent,  without  envy,  heartily, 
and  almost  unconsciously.  The  sect  was  the  pro- 
du3t  of  Ids  own  labor.  It  bore  strikingly  the  im- 
pijss  of  his  own  character.     Not  one  among  tho 


112  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    FORMATION. 

Keformers  could  encounter  him  in  debate,  nor  resist 
the  weight  of  his  authority,  nor  add  a  beam  to  the 
lijrht  which  he  shed.  His  word  was  the  law  of  the 
Keformation  ;  and  it  derived  its  force  from  the  un- 
wavering conviction  among  all  the  Eeformers  that 
it  was  in  perfect  harmony  with  the  Word  of  God. 
From  Maine  to  Georgia,  and  from  the  Atlantic 
coast  to  the  Far  West,  the  same  words  and  phrases 
— "a  pure  speech" — "  the  language  of  Canaan" — 
were  current  among  them  ;  and  every  portion  of  the 
circulating  medium  bore  the  unmistakable  impress 
^(rf  the  Bethany  mint.  Meet  a  Reformer,  where  you 
might,  or  under  whatever  circumstances,  he  would 
soon  utter  some  peculiar  word  or  phrase  which  would 
reveal  to  you,  without  doubt,  his  religious  opinions, 
and  party  preference. 

The  churches  organized,  under  the  influence,  and 
by  the  direction  of  Mr.  Campbell,  did  not  differ 
materially  in  form  and  discipline  from  the  Baptist 
churches.  Of  course,  the  Babylonish  practice  of 
hearing  experiences  before  baptism  was  repudiated  ; 
and  all  persons  applying  for  membership  in  these 
churches,  or  who  could  be  persuaded  to  accept  the 
privilege,  were  received  promptly,  on  professing 
their  belief  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth  is  the  Messiah, 
and  on  being  immersed  for  the  remission  of  sins. 
Every  church  had  a  plurality  of  bishops,  or  elders, 
chosen  from  its  own  body  ;  and  its  government  soon 
passed  from  the  hands  of  the  brotlierbood  to  thase 


CAMPBELLISM  IX   ITS    FORMATION.  113 

of  tBe  eldership,  witli  limitations,  into  wliicli  I  need 
not  stop  to  inquire.  The  churches  met  for  worship 
and  edification  every  Lord's  day,  even  in  the  most 
sparsely  peopled  neighborhoods — a  practice  wortliy 
of  commendation — and  broke  bread,  or  partook  of 
the  Lord's  supper,  as  a  part  of  the  instituted  wor- 
ship of  Christ,  at  every  meeting — a  practice, 
which,  though  neither  commanded,  nor  enforced  hy 
any  clear  apostolic  example,  contravenes  no  law  of 
Christ,  and  should  excite  no  opposition. 


-o-' 


4  r/^ . 


CAMPBELLISM  IN  ITS  PRINCIPLES. 

It  would  seem  to  be  impossible  for  any  j)erson 
admitting  the  inspiration  and  authority  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, and  drawing  his  principles  from  them,  not  to 
agree  with  other  Christians  in  many  tenets.  It  is  a 
redeeming  quality  in  Campbellism  that  it  uniformly 
professes  a  profound  respect  for  the  teaching  of  the 
Bible.  Mr.  Campbell  holds  many,  and  most  im- 
portant principles,  in  common  with  all  Christians. 
Nobly  did  he  vindicate  the  authenticity  and  inspira- 
tion of  the  Scriptures,  and  the  vital  principles  of 
Christianity,  in  his  debate  with  Robert  Owen,  of 
Scotland,  the  champion  of  infidelity  ;  and  by  that 
service  entitled  himself  to  the  gratitude  and  com- 
mendation of  the  friends  of  morality-and  social  order. 
Mr.  Campbell  holds  many  truths  in  common  with 
all  Protestants  ;  and  in  his  discussion  with  Bishop 
Purcell,  of  the  Romish  communion,  maintained 
them  with  signal  ability,  and  fully  justified  his  claim 
to  be  classed  among  the  able  defenders  of  Protest- 
antism. The  "  Debate  on  the  Roman  Catholic  Re- 
ligion"— a  small  volume — has  not  received  at  the 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES.  115 

hands  of  the  Protestant  puMic  the  favor  which  it 
justly  merits.  Mr,  Campbell  embraces  some  views 
in  common  with  Baptists.  Whatever  e^^ls  he  may 
have  done  them,  directly  and  indirectly — and  they 
have  been  neither  few  nor  small — he  should  have 
due  praise  for  his  indefatigable  efforts  to  restore-  the 
apostolic  baptism,  or  the  immersion  of  believers,  to 
expose  the  traditionary  origin  of  infant  baptism,  and 
to  show  that  the  primitive  churches  were  composed 
exclusively  of  baptized  believers.  He  gave  great 
prominence  in  his  teaching  to  a  few  principles  and 
practices  which  were  deemed  important,  but  not 
particularly  insisted  on  by  the  ministers  of  the  Bap- 
tist denomination.  Several  points  in  regard  to 
which  he  differed  from  them  are  of  very  little  mo- 
ment, and  would  have  attracted  but  slight  attention, 
had  they  not  been  parts  of  a  system  fraught  with 
agitation  and  mischief  Some  of  the  principles  em- 
braced by  him,  and  laid  at  the  foundation  of  his 
Reformation,  were  not  only  different  from  those  en- 
tertained by  the  Baptists,  and  evangelical  Christians 
generally,'  but  were  without  Scriptural  authority. 
Some  of  these  it  is  proposed  particularly  to  exam- 
ine. No  intentional  injustice  will  be  done  to  him 
or  his  principles.  His  opponents  and  reviewers 
have,  with  perhaps  no  exception,  been  accused  of 
misrepresenting  his  views  ;  and  I  fear  that  I  may 
subject  myself  to  the  same  accusation.  But,  I  am 
nnxir,u>.  to  diminish  rather  than  widen  the  breach 


116  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

between  the  Baptists  and  the  Reformers.  And 
this  must  be  effected,  if  effected  at  all,  neither  by 
exaggeration  nor  concealing  their  differences,  but 
by  a  fair,  kind,  faithful  and  logical  examination  of 
them.  I  design,  therefore,  to  discuss  with  as  much 
care  and  fullness  as  the  prescribed  limits  of  my  trea- 
tise may  permit,  a  few  of  the  distinctive,  and  most 
objectionable  Principles  of  Gamphellism. 

The  Influence  or  the  Holy  Spirit  in  Con- 
version. 

This  subject  is  one  of  vital  importance  in  the 
Christian  system.  The  admission  or  denial  of  the 
reality  and  efficiency  of  this  influence  constitutes 
the  main  difference  between  evangelical  and  ration- 
alistic theology — ^between  intelligent  living  piety, 
and  heartless,  self-sufficient  formalism.  Almost 
every  Christian  sect,  holding  grossly  erroneous  prin- 
ciples, has  included  among  its  errors  the  denial  or 
perversion  of  the  doctrine  of  the  spirit's  influence. 
Mr.  Campbell  in  his  debate  with  Eev.  N.  L.  Eice,  ad- 
mitted that  the  subject  is  "  of  transcendent  import- 
ance to  the  Christian" — page  611.  I  would,  there- 
fore, enter  on  its  investigation,  profoundly  conscious 
of  my  liability  to  err,  and  earnestly  seeking  wisdom 
"  of  God,  that  giveth  to  all  men  liberally,  and  up- 
braideth  not." 

On  no  subject  have  the  opponents  of  Mr.  Campbell, 
and  the  Christian  public  generally,  found  it  so  diffi- 
cult to  understand  am  represent  his  views  as  on  t^ 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES.  117 

important  point.  That  Mr.  Campbell  may  have  full 
justice,  I  wiR  make  copious  extracts  on  this  subject 
from  his  voluminous  works,  especially  from  a  "  Dia- 
logue on  the  Holy  Spirit,"  between  ^^  Timothy  " 
representing  the  doctrine  of  the  Reformation,  and 
"  Ausiin,"  a  very  docile  inquirer,  on  the  point  of 
embracing  the  new  doctrine,  contained  in  a  work 
entitled  "  Christianity  Restored,"  issued  from  the 
Bethany  press,  in  the  year  1835. 

"  It  is  a  moral  revolution,  a  moral  reformation,  a 
moral  change,  which  is  essential  to  the  salvation  of 
men.  The  means  therefore  must  be  moral,  unless 
we  can  think  that  physical  causes  can  produce  moral 
effects."     p.  346. 

"  We  have  two  sorts  of  power,  physical  and  moral. 
By  the  former  we  operate  on  matter — ^by  the  latter 
upon  mind.  To  put  matter  in  motion  we  use 
physical  power,  whether  we  call  it  animal  or  scien- 
tific power ;  to  put  minds  in  motion  we  use  argu- 
ments, or  motives  addressed  to  the  reason  and  na- 
ture of  man." 

"  Motives  are  arguments  ;  and  the  strength  of  an 
argument  is  its  power  to  move.  Arguments  are 
said  to  be  strong  or  weak,  according  to  their  power 
to  move." 

"  Because  arguments  are  addressed  to  the  under- 
standing, will,  and  affections  of  men,  they  are  called 
moral,  inasmuch  as  their  tendency  is  to  form  or 
change    the   hah  ts,   manners,   or   actions  of  men. 


118  CAMfBELLISM    IN    ITS   PRINCIPLES, 

Every  spirit  puts  forth  its  moral  power  in  words  ; 
tliat  is,  all  tlie  power  it  has  over  the  views,  habits, 
manners,  or  actions  of  men,  is  in  the  meaning  and 
arrangement  of  its  ideas  expressed  in  words  ;  or 
in  significant  signs  addressed  to  the  eye  or  ear." 
pp.  347,  348. 

"  The  argument  is  the  power  of  the  sph'it  of  man, 
and  the  only  poioer  which  one  spirit  can  exert  over 
another  is  its  arguments.  How  often  do  we  see  a  whole 
congregation  roused  into  certain  actions,  expressions 
of  joy  or  sorrow,  by  the  spirit  of  one  man.  Yet  no 
person  supposes  that  his  spirit  has  literally  deserted 
his  body  and  entered  into  every  man  and  woman  in 
the  house,  although  it  is  often  said  he  has  filled  them 
with  his  spirit.  But  how  does  that  spirit  located 
in  the  head  of  yonder  little  man,  fill  all  the  tlious- 
sands  around  him  with  joy  or  sadness,  wdth  fear  and 
trembling,  with  zeal  or  indignation,  as  the  case  may 
be  ?  How  has  it  displayed  such  power  over  so  many 
minds  ?  By  loords  uttered  hy  the  tongue  ;  hy  ideas 
communicated  to  the  minds  of  the  hearers.  In  this 
way  only  can  moral  power  be  displayed. 

"  From  such  premises  we  may  say,  that  all  the 
moral  power  which  can  be  exerted  on  human  beings, 
is,  and  of  necessity  must  be,  in  the  arguments 
addressed  to  them.  No  other  power  than  moral 
power  can  operate  on  minds;  and  this  power  must 
always  be  clothed  in  words  addressed  to  the  eye  or 
ear.     Thus  we  reason  when  revelation  is  altosrether 


CAMPBELLISM    IN   ITS    PRINCIPLES.  119 

out  of  view.  And  wlien  we  think  of  the  power  of 
the  Spirit  of  Grod  exerted  upon  minds  or  human 
spirits,  it  is  impossible  for  us  to  imagine,  that  that 
power  can  consist  in  anything  else  but  words  or 
arguments.  Thus  in  the  nature  of  things  we  are 
prepared  to  expect  verbal  communications  from  the 
Spirit  of  God,  if  that  Spirit  operates  at  all  on  our 
spirits.  As  the  moral  power  of  man  is  in  his  argu- 
ments, so  is  the  moral  power  of  the  Spirit  of  God  in 
his  arguments."     p.  349. 

"  As  the  spirit  of  man  puts  forth  all  its  moral 
poiver  in  the  words  which  it  fills  with  its  ideas  ;  so 
the  Spirit  of  God  puts  forth  all  its  converting  and 
sanctifying  power,  in  the  words  which  it  fills  with 

its  ideas If  the  Spirit  of  God  has  spoken  all 

its  arguments ;  or,  if  the  New  and  Old  Testament 
contain  all  the  arguments  which  can  be  offered  to 
reconcile  man  to  God,  and  to  purify  them  who  are 
reconciled,  then  all  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
which  can  operate  on  the  human  mind,  is  spent  ; 
and  he  that  is  not  sanctified  and  saved  by  these, 
cannot  be  saved  by  angels  or  spirits,  human  or 
divine."     p.  350. 

"  We  plead  that  all  the  converting  power  of  tJie 
Holy  Spirit  is  exhibited  in  the  Divine  Record." 
p.  351. 

"  Hence  it  follows,  that  to  Refilled  w  ith  the  Spirit  j 
and  to  have  the  Word  of  Christ  dwelling  richly  in 
one,  are  of  the  same  import  in  Paul's  mind  ;  and  as 


120  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   PKINClPLES. 

a  means  to  this  end,  Christians  were  to  abound  in 
singing  psalms,  hymns,  and  spiritual  songs."  p.  360. 

"  All  the  power  of  God  or  man  is  exhibited  in 
the  truth  which  they  propose.  Therefore,  we  may 
say,  that  if  the  light,  or  the  truth,  contain  all  the 
moral  power  of  God,  then  truth  alone  is  all  that  is 
necessary  to  the  conversion  of  men,  for  we  have 
before  argued  and  proved,  that  the  converting 
power  is  moral  power."     p.  362. 

''Assistance  to  believe!  This  is  a  metaphysical 
dream.  How  can  a  person  be  assisted  to  believe  ? 
What  sort  of  help  ?  and  how  much  is  wanting  ? 
Assistance  to  believe  must  be  either  to  create  a 
power  in  man,  which  he  had  not  before,  or  to  repair 

a  broken  power The  Holy  Spirit  was  not 

given  until  the  day  of  Pentecost.  Hence  if  the 
Holy  Spirit  aided  men  to  believe  in  Jesus  Christ,  it 
must  have  been  subsequent  to  that  date."  pp. 
364,  365. 

"  Can  men  just  as  they  are  found  when  they  hear 
the  Gospel,  believe  ?  I  answer  boldly,  yes — just  as 
easily  as  I  can  believe  the  well-attested  facts  con- 
cerning the  person  and  achievements  of  General 
George  Washington.  I  must  hear  the  facts  clearly 
stated,  and  well  authenticated,  before  I  am  able  to 
believe  them.  The  man  who  can  believe  one  fact 
well  attested,  can  believe  any  other  fact  equally  well 
attested."     Chh.  Bap.,  529. 

"  Paul  acts  the  philosopher  fully  once,  and,  if  we 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PKINCIPLES.  121 

recolleo.  right,  but  once,  in  all  his  writings  upon 
this  subject.  It  has  been  for  many  years  a  favorite 
topic  with  me.  It  is  in  his  first  epistle  to  Timothy, 
*  Now  the  end  of  the  commandment  (or  Gospel)  is 
love  out  of  a  pure  heart — out  of  a  good  conscience — 
cut  of  faith  unfeigned/  Faith  unfeigned  brings  a 
person  to  remission,  or  to  a  good  conscience  ;  a  good 
conscience  precedes,  in  the  order  of  nature,  a  pure 
heart ;  and  this  is  the  only  soil  in  which  love,  a 
plant  of  celestial  origin,  can  grow^  This  is  our 
phUosophy  of  Christianity — of  the  Gospel.  And 
thus  it  is  the  wisdom  and  power  of  God  unto  salva- 
tion. We  proceed  upon  these  as  our  axiomata  in 
all  our  reasonings,  preachings,  writings — 1st,  un- 
feigned faith  ;  2d,  a  good  conscience  ;  3d,  a  pure 
heart ;  4th,  love.  The  testimony  of  God  appre- 
hended, produces  unfeigned  or  genuine  faith ;  faith 
obeyed,  produces  a  good  conscience.  This  Peter 
defines  to  be  the  use  of  baptism,  the  answer  of  a 
good  conscience.  This  produces  a  pure  heart,  and 
then  the  consummation  is  love — love  to  God  and 
man."     Christian  System,  246. 

It  would  be  easy  to  multiply  quotations  of  this 
kind  ;  but  the  above  will  sufiice  to  give  clear  and 
just  views  of  Mr.  Campbell's  theory  of  the  influ- 
ence of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  conversion  and  sane- 
tification  of  men.  There  can  be  no  mistake  in  re- 
ducing the  system  to  the  following  propositions. 

A  moral  chan;rc  Is  essential  to   the  salvation  of 


122  C^MIPBEILISM    IN    ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

men — This  change  can  be  effected  only  by  moral 
power — All  moral  pDwer  is  in  arguments,  or  truth, 
addressed  to  the  mind  by  words,  or  other  signs, 
equivalent  to  words — All  the  converting  power  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  is  in  the  words  which  he  addresses 
to  men  in  the  Scriptures — Men  need  no  divine  oi 
supernatural  aid  to  exercise  saving  faith  in  Christ  ; 
but  can  believe  in  him  as  easily  as  they  can  believe 
the  well  attested  history  of  General  Washington. 
This  faith  does  not  imply  the  existence  of  love,  but 
brings  a  person  to  remission,  or  a  good  conscience, 
through  baptism  ;  to  a  good  conscience  succeeds  a 
pure  heart ;  and  from  a  pure  heart  flows  love — And, 
finally,  to  be  filled  with  the  Spirit  is  equivalent  to 
being  filled  with  the  word. 

Of  several  positions  in  this  scheme  I  disapprove  ; 
but  shall,  for  the  present,  confine  my  remarks  to 
its.  principal  error — viz.,  that  all  the  converting 
power  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  ire  the  luriUen  tvord, 
which  he  has  indited  and  confirmed. 

It  is  desirable  to  divest  this  subject  of  all  extra- 
neous matter.  I  fully  concur  with  Mr.  Campbell 
in  the  opinion  that  a  moral  change  is  necessary  to 
the  salvation  of  men.  With  all  that  he  has  written 
of  the  inspiration  and  importance  of  the  Scriptures, 
and  of  their  adaptation  to  promote  the  salvation  ot 
men,  I  heartily  agree.  I  do  not  think,  more  than 
he,  that  any  new  faculty  is  given,  or  any  old  faculty 
(understanding   by  the  term  physical,   not  moral 


CAMP! ell: SM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES.  123 

powei^)  is  repaired  in  conversion.  It  is  freely  ad- 
mitted that  the  Spirit  operates  through  the  word 
in  the  conversion  and  sanctification  of  men.  But  I 
understand  Mr  Campbell  to  maintain  that  the  in- 
fluence of  the  Spirit  in  the  work  of  conversion  is 
limited,  and  of  necessity,  to  the  simple  presenta- 
tion of  arguments,  motives,  truth,  to  the  minds  of 
men,  by  means  of  words,  and  other  signs — that  all 
the  power  of  the  Spirit  in  the  conversion  of  men  is 
in  moral  suasion.  This  he  does  explicitly  teach,  if 
words  have  any  definite  import.  By  physical  power 
we  operate  on  matter — by  moral  power  on  mind. 
"  All  the  moral  power  which  can  be  exerted  on 
human  beings,  is,  and  of  necessity  must  be,  in  the 
arguments  addressed  to  them."  The  illustration 
employed  by  Mr.  Campbell  would  seem  to  preclude 
the  possibility  of  misunderstanding  his  views.  The 
influence  of  an  orator  over  his  hearers  is  not  exerted, 
by  the  entrance  of  his  spirit  into  them,  but  "  hy 
words  uttered  hy  the  tongue  ;  hy  ideas  coramuni- 
cated  to"  their  minds.  Of  precisely  the  same 
nature  is  the  influence  ascribed  by  Mr.  Campbell  to 
the  Spirit  in  the  conversion  of  men.  "  As  the 
moral  power  of  man  is  in  his  arguments,  so  is  the 
moral  power  of  the  Spirit  of  God  in  his  arguments." 
The  Spirit  of  God  exerts  a  moral  influence  in  con- 
version exactly  like  that  which  men  exert  in  con- 
trolling the  actions  or  emotions  of  one  another,  but 
stronger  in  proportion  as  his  arguments  are  clearer, 


124  CAMPBELLISM   IxS'   ITS   PRINaPLES. 

fuller,  weightier,  and  more  pertiDeatly  expressed. 
But  the  Spirit  can  do  no  more  than  reason,  expos- 
tulate, and  present  motives. 

"  If  the  New  and  Old  Testament  contain  all  the 
arguments  which  can  be  offered  to  reconcile  man  to 
God,  and  to  purify  them  who  are  reconciled,  then 
all  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit  lohicli  can  operate 
on  the  human  mind  is  spent ;  and  he  that  is  not 
sanctified  and  saved  by  these,  cannot  he  saved  by 
angels,  or  spirits,  human  or  divine." 

I  should  deem  it  needless  to  labor  this  point  so 
carefully,  did  I  not  know  that  Mr.  Campbell  and 
his  friends  have  almost  constantly  charged  his  op- 
ponents with  falsely  stating  his  views  on  this  very 
subject.  These  were  the  views  of  "  the  agency  of 
the  Holy  Spirit"  against  which  the  "  Dover  Decree" 
was  levelled.  Elder  A.  Broaddus  in  the  "  Appendix" 
to  the  "  Extra  Examined,"  published  in  1831,  thus 
wrote  : — ''  In  few  words,  then,  Mr.  Campbell's 
view,  in  regard  to  Divine  influence,  appears  to  me 
to  be  in  substance  as  follows — The  canon  of  Scrip- 
ture being  closed,  the  actual  work  of  the  Spirit  is 
done  ;  but  the  word  of  truth  being  dictated  by  the 
Holy  Spirit — the  influence  of  that  word  may  be 
termed  the  influence  of  the  Spirit :  and  this  is  all 
the  Divine  influence  that  is  exerted.  And  then, 
God's  Spirit,  which  is  a  Holy  Spirit,  being  in  his 
word,  as  my  spirit  (for  example)  is  in  my  writings 
— in  receiving  the  word  we  receive  a  holy  spirit  : 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES.  125 

and  this  is  all  the  Holy  Spirit  that  is  recehed.'  p. 
48.  Such  were  the  views  entertained  by  this  astute 
and  ingenuous  writer,  of  Mr.  CampbcH's  doctrine 
on  the  influence  of  the  Spirit.  This  "  Appendix" 
was  noticed  by  the  Editor  of  the  Harbinger  in 
several  Nos.  of  the  Dialogue  on  the  Holy  Spirit, 
between  Timothy  and  Austin  ;  and,  for  a  wonder, 
IMr.  B.'s  statement  of  the  doctrine  was  not  called  in 
question, 

Mr.  Campbell  maintains,  or  did  maintain,  that 
all  the  converting  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  in  the 
arguments  or  motives  whicJi  he  presents  to  the  mind 
in  the  loritten  Word.  On  this  point  I  take  issue 
with  him.  I  maintain  that  there  is  an  infiuence  of 
the  Spirit,  internal,  mighty,  and  efficacious,  differ- 
iiig  from  moral  suasion,  hut  ordinarily  exerted 
through  the  inspired  Word,  in  the  conversion  of 
sinners.  Whether  this  influence  shall  be  called 
moral,  from  the  efi'ect  which  it  produces,  physical, 
from  the  energy  which  is  put  forth  in  it  ;  or  spirit- 
ual, from  the  nature  of  the  agent  who  exerts  it,  I 
have  no  wish  to  decide.  It  is  for  the  reality  and 
importance  of  this  influence,  not  for  its  name,  that 
I  contend. 

The  principal  argument  adduced  by  Mr.  Camp- 
bell in  support  of  his  theory  of  conversion,  is  purely 
metaphysical.  All  power,  he  says,  is  either  phy- 
sical or  moral — by  ]>hysical  power  we  operate  on 
matter,  and  by  moral   power  on  mind      A   physical 


126  ^  AMP  3ELLISM    IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES. 

power  cannot  produce  a  moral  effect.  "  And  when 
we  think  of  the  power  of  the  Spirit  of  God  exerted 
upon  minds  or  human  spirits,  it  is  impossihle  for  us 
to  imagine,  that  that  power  can  consist  in  any  thing 
else  but  words  or  arguments."  The  gist  of  Mr 
Campbell's  logic  seems  to  be  this — "VYe  cannot  com- 
prehend any  power  of  the  Spirit  of  God  in  conver- 
sion, except  that  consisting  in  words  or  arguments  : 
tlierefore,  it  does  not  exist.  What  is  this,  but  to 
deduce  a  most  unwarrantable  conclusion  from  his 
own  ignorance  ?  It  w^ere  a  sufficient  reply  to  this 
reasoning,  to  quote  the  words  of  the  Saviour — "  The 
wind  bloweth  where  it  listeth,  and  thou  hearest  the 
sound  thereof,  but  canst  not  tell  whence  it  cometh, 
nor  whither  it  goeth,  so  is  every  one  that  is  born  of 
the  Spirit."  John  3  :  8.  But  we  have  more  to  say 
on  this  subject.  To  affirm,  as  Mr.  Campbell  does, 
"that  if  the  Holy  Spirit  has  spohen  all  its  argu- 
ments, .  .  .  then  all  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
which  can  operate  upon  the  human  mind  is  spent," 
is  a  bold  assumption.  When  a  man  has  uttered  all 
his  arguments  and  persuasions  to  influence  his  fol- 
low, his  power  may  be  exhausted  ;  but  when  the 
Infinite  Spirit  has  spoken  all  his  arguments  and 
persuasions  for  reconciling  proud,  perverse  and 
stupid  men  to  Christ,  is  his  power  spent  ?  Is  there 
nothing  more  that  he  can  do  ?  Are  his  resources 
exhausted  ?  Has  he  thus  limited  himself  ?  Has 
Mr.    Campbell  any  authority  for  prescribing  this 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES.  127 

limit  to  his  power  ?  The  truth  is,  this  assumption 
is  as  unpJiilosopMcal  as  it  is  unscrij)tural.  God 
created  the  human  spirit — ^has  access  to  it — is  per- 
fectly acquainted  with  all  its  .springs  of  emotion  and 
of  action — and  can,  in  ways  unknown  to  us,  and 
without  contravening  the  laws  of  its  being,  influence, 
impress,  and  guide  it.  He  that  made,  can  certainly 
renew  the  spirit  of  man,  with  means,  or  without 
them,  as  he  pleases.  It  is  no  less  the  dictate  of 
reason  than  of  revelation,  that  "  the  king's  heart," 
and  consequently  the  heart  of  every  other  man,  "  is 
in  the  hand  of  the  Lord,  as  the  rivers  of  water  ;  he 
turneth  it  whithersoever  he  wiU." 

The  assumption  that  the  Spirit  can  operate  ou 
the  soul  of  man  in  conversion  only  by  arguments,  or 
words,  is,  not  only  unphilosophical,  but  contrary  to 
divinely  recoi'ded facts.  It  is  not  true  that  physi- 
cal power  cannot  produce  a  moral  effect.  God 
created  man,  not  by  arguments  or  words,  but  by  the 
direct  exercise  of  physical  power,  in  his  "  own  image" 
— which  image  comprehended  "  righteousness  and 
true  holiness."  Was  not  this  a  moral  effect  pro- 
duced by  a  physical  cause  ?  Christ  was  created 
holy.  "  The  Holy  Ghost  shall  oome  upon  thee," 
said  the  angel  to  Mary,  "and  the  power  of  the 
Highest  shall  overshadow  thee  :  therefore  that  holy 
thing  which  shall  be  born  of  thee,  shall  be  called  the 
Son  of  God."  Luke  4  :  35.  Was  not  the  holiness 
of  the  infant  Redeemer  a  moral  quality  ?     And  was 


128  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES. 

not  this  effect  produced,  not  by  arguments,  persua- 
sion, or  words,  but  by  the  "  power,"  the  physical 
"power  of  the  Highest  ?" 

The  assumption  under  consideration  is  incompati- 
ble with  the  salvation  of  infants.  They  enter  into 
the  world,  as  Mr.  Campbell  admits,  with  depraved 
hearts.  Dying  before  they  attain  to  years  of  intel- 
ligence, they  must  enter  heaven  with  their  moral 
natures  unchanged,  which  is  impossible  ;  they  must 
be  renovated  by  death,  which  is  a  mere  figment  ; 
they  must  be  renewed  by  the  Holy  Spirit  without 
the  Word,  the  possibility  of  which  Mr.  Campbell 
cannot  conceive  ;  or,  they  must  be  lost.  I  do  not 
charge  him  with  admitting  this  consequence  ;  but  it 
appears  to  be  logically  deduced  from  the  iX).sition 
which  he  assumes,  and  all  his  ingenuity  has  not 
enabled  him  to  escape  from  it. 

Mr,  Campbell's  assumption  is  wholly  at  war  with 
the  Scripture  doctrine  of  Satanic  influence.  Satan 
and  other  evil  spirits  are  represented  in  the  Blblo 
as  exerting  a  mighty  moral  influence  for  the  destruc- 
tion of  men.  They  tempt,  deceive,  enslave,  and 
degrade  mankind.  Satan  is  a  mighty  prince,  and 
at  the  head  of  a  great,  spreading  empire.  But  how 
do  the^  evil  spirits  exert  an  influence  over  the  minds 
of  men  ?  By  arguments,  or  motives,  addressed  to 
them  by  words,  oral  or  written  ?  Certainly  not ! 
But  by  a  direct,  internal,  and  efficient  influence. 
Can  Mr.  Campbell  comprehend  it  ?     Will  he  reject 


CAMPBELL.SM   IN    ITS   PRINCIPLES.  129 

the  doctrine  because  lie  cannot  ?  Or  will  he  con-" 
cede  to  Satan  and  his  angels,  a  power  which  he 
denies  to  the  Spirit  of  God  ? 

Before  quitting  this  subject,  another  point  de- 
mands notice.  No  writer  has  so  bitterly  denounced 
metaphysical  speculations,  and  mystic  theology  as 
Mr.  Campbell.  One  great  object  of  hisReformation 
was  to  rescue  the  Scriptures  from  the  glosses  of  secta- 
rian thcorizers.  I  must  say,  tliat  I  have  met  with  no 
writer  on  the  agency  of  the  Spirit  in  conversion,  who 
has  indulged  so  much  in  metaphysical  disquisition, 
labored  so  hard  to  establish  a  theor}^,  or  drawn  such 
momentous  consequences  from  his  own  fine-spun 
speculations.  In  his  writings  on  this  delicate  and 
vital  subject,  he  is  far  from  confining  himself  to  "a 
pure  speech,"  of  "  speaking  of  Bible  things  in  Bible 
terms,"  and  shows  no  peculiar  desire  to  be  guided 
by  the  plain  and  obvious  import  of  Scripture  lan- 
guage ;  but  taxe?  his  psychological  lore,  and  dia- 
lectic skill,  to  establish  an  ingenious  theory  drawn 
from,  no  matter  what  source — but  not  from  revela- 
tion. True,  he  apologizes  for  his  seeming  inconsis- 
tency, lie  only  opposes  his  enemies  with  their 
own  weapons.  He  plunges  into  metajjhysics  to  ex- 
tricate others  from  iheir  labyrinth.  The  apology 
does  not  seem  to  me  to  be  satisfactory.  If  Mr. 
Campbell  uses  the  "speech  of  Ashdod,"  why  may 
not  others  ?     How  are"  we  ever  to  be  rescued  from 


130  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS   rRINClPLES, 

metaphysical  subtleties,  if  those  who  profess  to  le. 
form  the  ahuse  are  most  guilty  of  it  ? 

I  have  endeavored  to  show,  and,  I  think,  have 
shown,  that  the  doctrine  that  the  Holy  Spirit  can 
operate  on  the  mind  in  conversion  only  by  argument 
or  persuasion  is  a  mere  assumption,  unphilosophical 
in  itself,  contrary  to  divinely  attested  facts,  and 
pregnant  with  a  most  serious  consequence.  I  would 
not,  however,  press  this  argument  to  an  iUegitimate 
extent.  It  does  not  follow  that  because  the  Spirit 
can  operate  on  the  mind,  in  other  ways  than  by 
moral  suasion,  that  he  does  so  operate.  This  point 
must  be  established  by  other  considerations. 

I  will  now  proceed  to  offer  direct  arguments 
against  Mr.  CamjciheU's  theory  of  conversion. 

1.  It  overlooks,  or  at  least,  under-estimates,  the 
inveteracy  of  human  dei^ravity. 

The  Spirit  of  inspiration  has  drawn  the  picture  of 
man's  moral  corruption  in  gloomy  colors.  He  is 
utterly  dejiraved — fleshly,  sensual  and  impure. 
"  That  which  is  born  of  the  flesh  is  flesh."  John 
3:  6.  He  is  without  spiritual  life,  without  holiness, 
without  moral  worth — "  dead  in  trespasses  and 
sins."  Eph.  2:1.  He  is  alienated  from  God^  and 
opposed  to  his  law,  and  consequently  to  truth  and 
righteousness.  "  Because  the  carnal  mind  is  en- 
mity against  God  :  for  it  is  not  subject  to  the  law 
of  God,  neither  indeed  can  be."  Kom.  8:  7.  This 
depravity  pervades,  and  controls  the  whole  man — 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    rRINCli'LES.  131 

blinding  the  mind,  perverting  the  affections,  stupi- 
fying  the  conscience,  making  rebellious  and  obsti- 
nate the  will,  and  prostituting  the  members  of  the 
body  as  the  instruments  of  sin.  And  this  moral 
corruption  of  human  nature  is  universal.  "  For  all 
have  sinned  and  come  short  of  the  glory  of  God." 
Rom.  3:  23. 

It  is  proposed  to  make  man,  thus  corrupt,  obsti- 
nate and  debased,  a  friend  of  God,  humble,  obedient, 
and  meet  for  heaven — in  short,  "  a  new  creature," 
from  whom  "  old  things  have  passed  away,"  and  to 
whom  "  all  things  have  become  new."  2.  Cor.  5: 
17.  I  do  not  charge  Me.  Campbell  with  denying 
the  doctrine  of  human  depravity  ;  but  his  theory  of 
conversion  does  not  provide  for  the  accomplishment 
of  a  moral  renovation,  at  once  so  difficult,  and  so 
important. 

How,  according  to  his  scheme,  is  this  great  moral 
change  to  be  effected  .?  Simply  by  the  presentation 
of  arguments,  truth,  and  persuasion,  to  the  mind  by 
words,  or  other  signs.  When  the  Spirit  has  present- 
ed all  his  arguments,  he  has  spent  all  his  power. 
Of  this  scheme  several  things  may  be  observed. 

First.  It  is  oblivious  of  the  chief  difficulty  in  con- 
version. Mr.  Campbell  maintains  that  "  the  argu- 
ments which  are  written  in  the  New  Testament" 
must  be  "  understood"  in  order  to  exert  their  in- 
fluence on  the  human  mind.  Chn'ty.  Restored,  p. 
350      To  understand  these  arguments  requires  at- 


132  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   I  IINCIPLES. 

tention,  candor,  and  a  spiritual  discernment.  Men 
attend  readily  to  what  they  delight  iti,  and  believe 
easily  what  is  congenial  with  their  tastes  ;  but  the 
"  natural  man/'  the  unrenewed,  sinful  man — ^has  a 
deep-rooted  aversion  to  divine  truth.  This  aversion 
is  an  element  and  a  proof  of  his  depravity.  He 
may  hear  or  read  the  arguments  contained  in  the 
Scriptures,  through  curiosity,  politeness,  or  a  cap- 
tious spirit  ;  but  to  expect  of  him  a  candid,  serious, 
docile  and  obedient  attention  to  them,  is  to  expect 
to  ''  gather  grapes  of  thorns,  or  figs  of  thistles." 
"  For  every  one  that  doetli  evil  hateth  the  light, 
neither  cometh  to  the  light,  lest  his  deeds  should  be 
reproved."  If  divine  truth  must  be  understood  in 
order  to  be  efficacious  ;  and  if  it  must  be  candidly 
examined,  before  it  can  be  understood  ;  and  if  every 
evil  doer,  hating  the  light,  or  divine  truth,  refuses 
to  come  to  it,  or  consider  it,  how,  on  Mr.  Camp- 
bell's theory,  can  any  soul  of  man  be  saved  ?  But 
the  scheme  which  I  advocate — the  Scriptural  scheme 
— makes  provision  for  overcoming  this  difficulty. 
God,  by  the  gracious,  inward,  efficacious  influence 
of  his  Spirit,  prepares  the  heart  for  the  reception  of 
the  Gospel.  "  Whose  heart,"  that  is,  Lydia's  heart, 
"  the  Lord  opened,  that  she  attended  unto  the 
things  which  were  spoken  of  Paul."  Acts.  16:  14. 
This  woman  "worshipped  God,"  as  did  all  the  Jews, 
and  Jewish  proselytes  ;  but  there  is  not  the  slight- 
est proof  that  she  was  pious.     The  very  reverse  is 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES.  133 

clear.  Her  heart  was  closed  against  the  Gospel, 
else  there  had  been  no  need  for  God  to  open  it. 
She  hated  the  light,  neither  would  come  to  it. 
'•  The  Lord  opened,"  or  inclined,  her  "heart"  to  at- 
tend "  to  the  things  which  were  spoken  of  Paul." 
Mr.  Campbell  is  of  opinion  that  the  Lord  opened 
Lydia's  heart  by  the  miracles  which  were  wrought 
in  confirmation  of  the  Gospel.  Chn'ty  Restored,  p. 
354.  Of  this  there  is  neither  proof  nor  probability. 
There  was  no  miracle  wrought  on  the  occasion. 
Miracles  were  utterly  insufficient  to  awaken  an  obe- 
dient and  saving  attention,  like  that  which  Lydia 
gave,  to  the  Gospel.  John  11  :  47.  The  Lord 
opened  the  heart  of  this  woman  of  Thyatira — really 
and  effectively  opened  her  heart,  by  a  process  which 
is  not  explained.  As  the  result  of  this  process  she 
attended,  promptly,  honestly,  and  obediently  to 
Paul's  Gospel ;  and  but  for  this  processj  the  apostle, 
though  he  had  spoken  as  an  angel,  had  spoken 
without  success. 

Secondly.  Suppose  this  great  difficulty  obviated, 
the  sinner's  attention  arrested,  and  truth  brought 
clearly  before  his  mind,  would  I'noivledge  of  dv^ne 
truth,  ivUhout  the  special  injluence  of  the  Spirit, 
secure  his  conversion  ?  If  ignorance  is  the  only 
evil  with  which  the  Gospel  has  to  contend,  then 
obviously  the  illumination  of  the  mind  is  all  that  is 
necessary  for  its  removal.  But  ignorance,  though 
it  may  be  in  itself  criminal,  is  rather  the  effect  than 


134  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS    PlilNClPLEo, 

the  cause  of  man's  depravity.  There  is  a  corrupt 
disposition  which  blinds  the  understanding.  "  This 
is  the  condemnation,  that  light  is  come  into  the 
world,  and  men  loved  darkness  rather  than  light, 
because  their  deeds  were  evil."  John  3  :  19.  The 
love  of  darkness — which  signifies  ignorance  or  error — 
is  the  very  root  of  man's  depravity.  This  love  im- 
plies an  aversion  to  light,  truth,  and  holiness,  and 
is  the  cause  of  the  prevalent  ignorance  of  divine 
things  in  the  world.  Conversion  includes  a  cordirJ 
approbation  of  divine  truth.  2  Thess.  2  :  10.  Now, 
can  arguments,  however  clear  and  weighty — persua- 
sion, however  earnest  and  tender — and  words,  how- 
ever fitly  chosen  and  expressive,  change  the  tastes 
and  dispositions  of  the  soul  ?  Man  hates  Christ, 
not  because  he  is  ignorant  of  his  character,  but 
because  of  the  contrariety  in  their  tastes  and  dispo- 
sitions ;  and  it  is  proposed  to  change  this  hatred  into 
love,  sim2)ly  by  giving  man  clearer  views  of  the 
qualities  which  excite  his  aversion.  Man  is  opposed 
to  the  divine  law,  because  it  is  pure,  spiritual,  and 
inflexible ;  and  it  is  proposed  to  overcome  this 
opj)Osition  by  revealing  to  him  more  fully  its  hated 
(j^ualities.  Man  is  averse  to  the  light  ;  and  it  is 
proposed  to  subdue  this  aversion  by  increasing  its 
splendor.  I  cannot  but  suspect  the  inefficacy  of 
this  scheme  of  conversion.  Sinful  man  needs  some- 
thing more  than  light — more  than  arguments,  per- 
suasion, words — for  his  moral  renovation.     "  The 


CAMFBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINdPLES.  135 

♦kicked  .  .  will  not  listen  to  the  voice  of  charmers, 
charming  never  so  wisely. '     Ps.  58  :  5. 

Thirdly.  The  theory  under  discussion  is  contra- 
dicted hy  numerous  luell  authenticated  facts.  If  all 
the  converting  power  of  the  Spirit  is  in  the  argu- 
ments addressed  by  him  in  words  to  the  mind  ;  then 
it  follows  that  every  minister  of  the  Word  must  be 
successful  in  converting  souls  to  Christ,  in  propor- 
tion to  the  distinctness  with  which  he  presents  the 
arguments  of  the  Spirit  to  the  minds  of  his  hearers. 
The  same  measure  of  power  must,  under  similar 
circumstances,  produce  similar  results.  But  does 
this  conclusion  agree  with  the  experience  and  obser- 
vation of  Christian  ministers  ?  But  I  need  riot 
appeal  in  this  argument  to  questionable  evidence. 
Christ  was  an  unrivalled  preacher  of  the  Gospel. 
Mark  1:1.  Never  man  spake  as  he  did.  For  the 
weight  of  his  arguments,  the  clearness  of  his  illus- 
trations, the  simplicity  and  force  of  his  style,  the 
fervency  of  his  spirit,  the  dignity  of  his  manner,  the 
adaptation  of  his  discourses  to  the  circumstances  and 
necessities  of  his  hearers,  indeed,  for  every  excel- 
lence which  could  render  his  ministry  attractive, 
luminous,  and  successful,  he  stands  alone.  Pro- 
phets and  apostles  gave  him  homage  as  the  "Light 
of  the  world."  If  all  the  converting  power  of  the 
Spirit  is  in  moral  suasion,  we  might  certainly  infer 
that  such  a  teacher  as  Christ  would  be  eminently 
successful  in  winning  souls.     But  what  was   the 


136  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    PRII^ClP,jES. 

result  of  his  ministry  ?  It  was  unsuccessful — not 
wholly  so — ^but  it  produced  no  such  results,  as  from 
his  preeminent  qualifications  might  have  been  ex- 
pected— no  great  moral  revolution,  and  no  extensive 
revival  of  true  religion.  His  ministry  seems  to  have 
been  less  effective  than  that  of  John  the  Baptist. 
Matt.  3  :  5,  Q.  More  persons  were  probably  con- 
verted by  the  preaching  of  Peter  and  the  other 
apostles,  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  than  by  the  min- 
istry of  Jesus  during  its  whole  period.  The  Apostle 
Paul  quotes  from  Isa.  65  :  2,  a  prediction  of  the  man- 
ner in  which  the  Messiah's  ministry  would  be  treated 
among  the  Jews.  "  But  to  Israel  he  saith,  All  day 
long  I  have  stretched  forth  my  hands  unto  a  diso- 
bedient and  gainsaying  people."  Eom.  10 :  21. 
This  prophecy  was  strikingly  fulfilled  in  the  history 
of  Jesus.  »  He  was  earnest  and  diligent  in  teaching. 
"  All  day  long  I  have  stretched  forth  my  hands." 
He  uttered  such  arguments  as  should  have  convinced, 
and  such  entreaties  as  should  have  moved,  his  hear- 
Qxs  ;  but  they  were  ^'  disobedient  and  gainsaying." 
The  arguments,  motives,  and  words  of  the  Saviour, 
were  eminently  suited  for  their  conversion  ;  but  the 
converting  power  of  the  Spirit  was  not  present — 
was  withheld  in  wisdom  and  righteous  judgment. 

2.  Mr.  CamphelVs  theory  of  the  Spirit's  influence 
is  incom.j)atible  toith  prayer  for  the  conversion  of 
sinners. 

I  do  not  charge  him  with  denying,  or  questioning, 


CAMPBELLISM    IN   ITS    PEINCIPLES.  137 

the  propriety  of  such  prayer.  On  the  contrary,  he 
insists  that  it  is  obligatory,  and  practices  it.  Still 
his  theory  and  his  practise  are  inconsistent.  If  all 
the  converting  power  of  the  Spirit  is  in  the  written 
Word,  then  all  that  can  be  done  for  the  conversion 
of  sinners  is  to  place  the  Word  before  their  minds. 
The  Spirit  indited  and  confirmed  the  Word,  and  in 
that  Word  put  forth  all  his  moral  or  converting 
power.  On  Christians  now  devolves  the  duty  of  pre- 
senting the  arguments,  truths,  and  motives,  contained 
in  the  written  Word,  to  the  minds  of  sinners. 
When  all  the  arguments  contained  in  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments  are  brought  before  their  minds, 
"  then  all  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit  which  can 
operate  upon"  them  •"  is  spent,"  and  if  they  are 
"  not  sanctified  and  saved  by  these,"  they  '*  cannot 
be  saved  by  angels  or  spirits,  human  or  divine." 
Why  then  pray  for  the  conversion  of  sinners  ?  Will 
the  Spirit  reveal  the  Word  to  their  minds  ?  or  in- 
cline their  hearts  to  receive  it  ?  Can  any  thing  bo 
added  by  the  Spirit  to  its  power  and  efficiency  ? 
Prayer  for  any  blessing  implies  the  power  of  God 
to  bestow  it.  When  we  pray  for  our  daily  bread, 
it  is  implied  that  God  so  governs  the  seasons  as  to 
send  rain  or  drought,  fruitfulncss  or  famine.  When 
we  pray  that  the  sick  may  be  healed,  it  is  implied 
that  God  has  such  a  control  over  man's  physical 
nature,  that  he  can,  without  a  miracle,  cure  his 
diseases.     So  ^hcn  we  pray  for  the  conversion  of 


138  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES. 

Binners,  if  we  pray  intelligently,  we  ascribe  to  the 
Holy  Spirit  tlie  power  to  convert  them.  And  this 
power  is  not  inherent  in  the  "Word,  any  more  than 
the  power  that  wields  a  sword,  is  inherent  in  the 
sword.  The  Word  is  the  instrument,  but  the 
Spirit  is  the  agent  of  conversion.  The  Spirit  gives 
efficiency  to  the  Word,  opening  the  mind  to  receive 
it,  impressing  it  on  the  heart,  and  developing  its 
excellence  in  the  life. 

3.  Mr.  Cam^hdV s  theory  of  conversion  is  incon- 
sistent luith  the  introduction  of  the  Millennium. 

I  will  permit  him  to  define  what  I  mean  by  the 
Millennium.  "  There  is  reason,  clear,  full,  and 
abundant,  to  justify  the  expectation  that  the  reign 
of  favor,  or  the  government  of  Jesus  Christ,  shall 
embrace,  under  its  most  salutary  influences,  the 
whole  human  race  ;  or  that  there  are  plain,  literal, 
and  unfigurative,  as  well  as  figurative  and  symbolic 
representations,  in  both  Testaments,  which  au- 
thorize us  to  expect  a  very  general,  if  not  a  uni- 
versal spread  of  evangelical  influences,  so  that  the 
whole  race  of  men,  for  a  long  period  of  time,  shall 
bask  in  the  rays,  and  rejoice  in  the  vivifying  power 
of  the  Sun  of  Kighteousness."  Mill.  Har.  vol  1,  p, 
54.  This  consummation,  described  in  the  glowing 
language  of  prophecy,  has  been  the  grand  object  of 
the  hopes,  prayers,  and  labors  of  the  saints  in  all 
ages.  Whatev(;r  contributes  to  hasten  this  glorious 
period  must,  if  its  tendency  is  perceived,  awaken 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES.  139 

universal  deliglit  among  the  lovers  of  Christ. 
Every  princij)le,  theory,  or  practice,  which  is  in- 
harmonious with  its  introduction  is  erroneous.  So 
Mr.  Camphell  very  properly  teaches.  "  In  de- 
tecting the  false  Gospels,  nothing  will  aid  us  S3 
much  as  an  examination  of  their  tendencies,  and  a 
comparison  of  their  effects  with  what  the  Millen- 
nium j)roposes.  The  gospel  of  no  sect  can  convert 
the  world.  This  is  with  us  a  very  plain  proposi- 
tion ;  and  if  so  the  sectarian  gospels  are  defective, 
or  redundant,  or  mixed."  Mill.  liar,  vol.  1,  p.  7 
With  the  sectarian  gospels  I  have  now  no  concern  : 
I  wish  to  inquire  whether  the  "ancient  Gogpel," 
furnislies  any  ground  to  hope  for  the  introduction 
of  the  Millennial  glory.  I  jjropose  to  try  it  by  the 
rule  which  Mr.  Campbell  himself  has  prescribed. 

The  Scriptural  canon  was  completed  nearl) 
eighteen  centuries  ago.  Christianity  was  clearly 
revealed,  perfect  in  all  its  i>arts,  and  confi'-med  by 
indubitable  testimonies.  The  inspired  record,  ac- 
cording to  the  teaching  of  the  Bethany  Eeformer, 
contains  all  t|ie  arguments  of  the  Holy  Spirit  for 
reconciling  men  to  God  ;  in  this  all  his  moral,  or 
converting  power  is  exhibited.  Christ  commissioned 
his  apostles  to  go  into  all  the  world,  and  proclaim 
the  Gospel  to  every  creature.  From  the  apostolic 
times  to  the  present  day,  the  servants  of  Christ, 
with  the  Old  and   New  Testaments  in  their  hands, 


140  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

have  been  laboring  to  convert  tbe  world  to  Christ 
What  has  been  the  success  of  their  efforts  ? 

Three-fifths  of  the  world  are  still  shrouded  in  the 
gloom  of  paganism.  Mohammedanism  sways  its 
hundred  millions  of  intelligent,  immortal  beings. 
The  ignorance,  superstition,  and  spiritual  domina- 
tion of  Popery  overspread  the  half  of  Christendom. 
The  Greek  church,  little  less  corrupt  and  intolerant 
than  the  Eomish,  divides  the  remaining  half  with 
Protestantism,  The  various  sects  of  Protestants, 
in  the  estimation  of  Mr.  Campbell,  stand  in  not 
much  less  need  of  conversion  than  the  heathen. 
Such  was  the  moral  condition  of  the  world  when  the 
"  current  reformation"  began.  Then  Mr,  Camp- 
bell and  his  associates,  disinterred  the  "  ancient 
Gospel"  from  the  accumulated  rubbish  of  past 
ages,  "  About  the  commencement  of  this  century," 
this  is  his  account  of  the  matter,  "  finding  that 
notes  and  comments,  that  glosses  and  traditions, 
were  making  the  word  of  God  of  little  or  no  effect 
— ^I  say,  the  pious  of  several  of  the  great  phalanxes 
of  the  rival  Christian  interests  did  agree  to  un- 
manacle  and  unfetter  the  testimony  of  God,  and 
send  it  forth  without  the  bolsters  and  crutches  fur- 
nished by  the  schools  ;  and  this,  with  the  spirit  of 
inquiry  which  it  created  and  fostered,  has  contrib- 
uted much  to  break  the  yoke  of  clerical  oppression, 
which  so  long  oppressed  the  people, — I  say  clerical 
oppression ;  for  this  has  been,  and  yet  is,  though 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES.  J4J 

much  circumscribed,  the  worst  of  all  sorts  of  op- 
pression." Mill.  Har.,  vol.  1,  p.  4.  Well,  does  the 
disinterred  Gospel,  or  the  unmanacled  and  unfet- 
tered testimony  of  God,  furnish  any  more  cheering 
indications  of  the  Millennial  dawn  than  the  secta 
rian  Gospels  ?  Its  most  sanguine  advocates  wil.. 
hardly  claim  that  it  does  ;  or  if  they  should,  the 
futility  of  the  claim  must  be  apparent  to  all  the 
world.  I  shall,  in  another  place,  examine  more 
particularly  the  tendency  and  influence  of  Camp- 
bellism.  I  will  merely  affirm,  what  I  suppose  none 
acquainted  with  its  progress  will  deny,  that  the  pro- 
claimers  of  the  "  ancient  Gospel"  have  found  from 
experience  that  all  the  arguments  which  they  can 
adduce  from  the  inspired  word — all  the  moral 
suasion  which  they  can  bring  to  bear  on  the  minds 
of  men — prove  deplorably  inefficient  in  their  con- 
version. Churches  organized  according  to  the 
"  ancient  order  of  things,"  enjoying  all  the  light 
that  emanates  from  Bethany,  blessed  with  the  un- 
manacled testimony  of  God,  without  "  bolsters  or 
crutches,"  free  from  "  clerical  oppression,"  and 
favored  with  the  ministrations  of  reformed  pastors, 
Df  their  own  selection,  have,  in  many  cases,  become 
3old,  worldly,  and  inefficient  ;  in  others,  have  fallen 
into  strife,  and  been  weakened  by  divisions  ;  in 
Bome,  have  nourished  in  their  bosoms  the  most 
deadly  errors  ;  in  not  a  few,  have  withered  and 
perished  ;  and,  if  any  of  them  have  enjoyed  unin- 


142  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRIN.  IPLES 

terrupted,  Millennial  prosperity,  their  history  is  yet 
to  be  made  known  to  the  world.  I  do  not  write 
these  things  to  disparage  the  Reformers.  I  intend 
no  invidious  comparison  between  the  fruits  of  the 
"  ancient  Gospel"  and  of  the  "  sectarian  Gospels." 
I  am  sorry  that  the  history  of  the  Eeformation 
should  bear  so  close  a  resemblance,  in  its  dark  and 
unpromising  features,  to  the  history  of  the  numerous 
Christian  sects.  The  above  facts  have  been  stated 
simply  because  they  are  essential  in  the  prosecution 
of  the  argument. 

How,  in  view  of  the  above  facts,  is  the  Millen- 
nium to  be  introduced  ^  Not  by  the  "  sectarian 
Gospels,"  says  Mr.  Campbell.  Not  by  the  slow, 
imperfect  and  feeble  progress  of  the  Bethany  Eefor- 
mation. He  that  hopes  for  such  a  result  from  it 
does  not  need  to  be  reasoned  with;  It  is  most 
manifest  that  the  Millennium  cannot  shed  its  bless- 
ings on  the  world  without  some  new  agency,  or  in- 
fluence, or  some  great  increase  of  existing  influences. 
We  need  expect  no  new  revelations  for  our  instruc- 
tion— no  new  powers  to  be  imparted  to  the  human 
mind — and  no  new  means  of  spreading  the  Gospel, 
and  enlisting  attention  to  it.  How  then  is  the  Mil- 
lennium to  be  introduced  '?  By  an  increased  effi- 
ciency of  the  divine  word.  At  this  point  the  weak- 
ness of  Campbellism  is  revealed.  It  admits  no  pro- 
vision for  an  increased  efficiency  of  the  divine  word. 
Its  tlieory  of  conversion  is  opposed  to  any  such  in- 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   F0RMA.T10N.  143 

crease.  The  Holy  Spirit,  in  the  presentation  of  its 
arguments,  has  exhibited  and  spent  all  its  converting 
power.  All  that  can  be  done,  according  to  this 
system,  by  men,  angels,  or  the  Holy  Spirit,  for  the 
introduction  of  the  Millennium,  is  to  exhibit  argu- 
ments or  truth  to  the  minds  of  men  ;  or,  in  other 
words,  persuade  them  to  be  holy.  What  is  this,  but 
precisely  what  has  been  done  by  true  ministers 
from  the  apostolic  age  down  to  the  present  time  ? 
And  what  ground  is  there,  according  to  this  system, 
to  conclude,  hope  or  conjecture,  that  moral  suasion 
will,  in  time  to  come,  be  more  efficacious  than  it  has 
been  in  time  past  ?  The  same  facts  and  arguments 
must  be  proclaimed,  in  similar  language,  by  men 
of  like  passions  and  infirmities,  and  to  the  same 
depraved,  stupid  and  perverse  race  of  beings,  as  in 
past  ages  ;  and  there  is  nothing  in  the  theory  under 
discussion,  or  the  nature  of  the  case,  to  justify  the 
expectation  that  the  fruits  will  materially  differ  in 
quality  or  quantity.  It  is  true,  the  Scrij)tures  pre- 
dict a  great  increase  of  knowledge  and  piety  in  tha 
latter  days  ;  and  Christ  will  certainly  fillfill  the  pre- 
diction ;  and  it  is  because  Mr.  Campbell's  theory  of 
the  Holy  Spirit's  influence  in  conversion,  not  only 
does  not  contain  any  provision  for  its  fulfillment,  but 
is  clearly  inconsistent  with  it,  that  it  ought  to  be  re- 
jected. But  the  view  of  the  Spirit's  agency  which  I 
maintain  falls  in  most  harmoniously  with  the  Scrip- 
ture promises  of  a  Millennium.     His  power  is  in- 


144  CAMPBELLISM    IN   ITS   FORMATION. 

finite.  He  executes  the  purposes  of  Messiah.  He 
can  impart  an  unction  to  the  ministers  of  Christ, 
and  increase  indefinitely  their  zeal,  diligence,  fidel- 
ity and  efficiency.  He  can  dwell  richly  in  all  the 
saints,  filling  their  understandings  with  light,  their 
hearts  with  love,  and  their  lives  with  his  fruits.  He 
can  incline  men  to  hear,  embrace,  and  adorn  the 
Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ.  In  short,  he  possesses  all 
the  grace  and  energy  which  are  requisite  to  secure 
the  universal  spread  and  triumph  of  the  Gospel. 
The  Millennium  is  to  he  introduced  not  merely  by 
moral  suasion,  and  providential  dispensations,  but 
by  copious,  general  and  powerful  effusions  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  The  same  Spirit  which  on  the  day  of 
Pentecost  gave  signal  success  to  the  labors  of  Peter, 
and  his  co-laborers,  will  by  a  mighty,  pervasive,  and 
gracious  agency — an  agency  in  harmony  with  his 
own  perfections,  and  the  freedom  of  the  human 
will — prepare  men  to  receive,  and  spread  abroad 
ihjb  Gospel,  and  thus  fill  the  earth  with  the  know- 
ledge of  the  glory  of  the  Lord. 

"  The  palaces,"  predicted  the  evangelical  pro- 
phet, "  shall  be  forsaken  ;  the  multitude  of  the  city 
shall  be  left  ;  the  forts  and  towers  shall  be  for  dens 
forever,  a  joy  of  wild  asses,  a  jDasture  of  flocks  ; 
U7itil  the  Spirit  he  'poured  upon  us  from  on  higli^ 
and  the  wilderness  be  a  fruitful  field,  and  the  fruit- 
ful field  be  counted  for  a  forest.  Then  judgment 
shall  dwell  in  the  wilderness,  and  righteousness  re- 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES.  145 

main  in  the  fruitful  field.  And  the  work  of  right- 
eousness shall  be  peace  ;  and  the  effect  of  right- 
eousness, quietness,  and  assurance  forever.  Isa.  3  : 
14-17. 

The  direct,  Scriptural  proofs  of  the  reality  of  this 
effective  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  I  shall  now  at- 
tempt to  furnish. 

4.  The  theory  of  conversion  by  moral  suasion  is 
contradicted  by  the  plain  teaching  of  the  Scriptures. 

The  question  under  discussion  is  not  one  of  meta- 
physics but  of  revelation — it  is  to  be  decided  not  by 
an  appeal  to  philosophy,  but  to  philology.  Of  the 
nature  and  operations  of  spirits,  and  of  the  laws 
which  govern  them,  we  know,  and  can  know,  but 
little.  Profoundly  convinced  of  our  ignorance,  and 
liability  to  err,  on  the  important  but  abstruse  subject 
under  consideration,  we  should  earnestly  inquire, 
what  saith  the  Lord  ?  and  endeavor,  with  childlike 
docility,  to  comprehend  the  import  of  his  words. 

The  inspired  teachers  have  employed  the  strongest 
terms  to  denote  that  agency,  or  influence  of  the 
Spirit,  by  which  fallen  man  is  morally  renewed.  If 
their  language  does  not  express  a  real,  effective 
agency  of  the  Spirit,  more  powerful  than  persuasion, 
or  the  mere  presentation  of  arguments  to  the  mind, 
it  is  difficult  to  conceive  how  such  an  agency  could  be 
described.  They  inform  us  simply  what  the  Spirit 
does,  without  attempting  to  explain  the  methods 
of  his  operation — an  explanation  which  we  should 


146  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    FRINClPLT.S. 

probably  be  unable  to  comprehend,  and  which  would 
be  unprofitable  even  if  we  could.  I  will  adduce  a 
few  passages  of  Scripture  which  teach  the  direct,  per- 
sonal agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  conversion.  These 
may  not,  in  the  judgment  of  other  advocates  of  the 
doctrine,  be  the  most  pertinent  or  conclusive  ;  and 
I  readily  admit  that  they  are  not  better  suited  to 
my  purpose  than  many  from  which  I  have  selected 
them. 

Conversion  is,  in  the  New  Testament,  described 
"Hi  a  hirtli — a  new  hirtli — a  birth  of  the  Spirit. 
'*  That  which  is  horn  of  the  Spirit  is  spirit"  John 
3:6.  "  We  know  that  zvhosoever  is  born  of  God 
sinneth  not  ;  but  he  that  is  begotten  of  God  keepeth 
himself,  and  that  wicked  one  touclieth  him  not."  1 
John  5  :  18.  I  shall  here  take  for  granted,  what 
ought  to  be  universally  conceded,  that  the  phrases 
"  born  of  the  Spirit,"  and  "  born  of  God,"  denote 
conversion,  or  the  moral  renovation  of  man — in  an- 
other place  I  propose  to  examine  this  subject  more 
particularly.  There  is  a  resemblance  between  gen- 
eration, or  the  natural  birth,  and  conversion.  The 
Spirit  of  inspiration  has  employed  this  resemblance 
to  elucidate  the  subject  of  man's  moral  renovation. 
In  physical  generation  the  nature  and  qualities  of 
the  parent  are  conveyed  to  the  child.  "  Adam 
begat  a  son  in  his  own  likeness."  "  That  which  is 
born  of  the  flesh  is  flesh" — that  is,  not  merely  cor- 
poreal,  but  depraved,  corrupt,  partaking  of  man's 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   II B   PRINCIPLES.  147 

fallen  nature,  as  the  term  flesh  frequently  means. 
So  in  the  new  birth,  the  nature — the  moral  nature 
— of  the  Spirit — of  God — ^is  conveyed  to  his  oiF- 
spring,  "  That  which  is  horn  of  the  Spirit  is 
spirit" — resembles  the  Spirit — partakes  of  his  holi- 
ness— is  spiritual.  "  Love  is  of  God  ;  and  everj 
one  that  loveth  is  born  of  God."  1  John  4:7 
This  mighty  moral  change  is  effected  by  the  Gospel 
"  Of  his  own  will  begat  he  us  with  the  word  of 
truth."  James  1:18.  "  The  word  of  truth"  was 
the  instrument  of  regeneration — the  efficiency  was 
of  God.  God  begat — communicated  his  own  nature, 
or  moral  qualities,  to  the  begotten — begat  "  of  his 
own  will,"  according  to  his  own  choice  or  purpose — ' 
and  the  Gospel  was  the  means  which  he  effectively 
used  in  producing  the  change.  To  ascribe  this 
spiritual  birth  to  the  power  in  the  word — to  the 
force  of  moral  suasion — rather  than  to  the  influence 
and  efficiency  of  the  Holy  Si)irit,  that  operates  by 
and  through  the  word — is  as  if  the  axe  should 
boast  itself  against  him  that  heweth  therewith,  or 
the  saw  magnify  itself  against  him  that  shaketh  it." 
Isaiah  10  :  15.  The  argument,  in  brief,  in  this — 
that  the  new,  or  moral  birth — implying  a  commu- 
nication of  the  divine  nature — is  effected  not  merely 
by  the  written  word,  but  is  ascribed  to  a  voluntary 
and  efficient  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

Conversion  is  termed  in  the  Scriptures  a  creation, 
and  described  in  a  varie(y  of  language  of  similar 


148  CAMPBELLISM    IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

iinport.  "  A  new  heaH  also  will  I  give  you,  aiir^t 
a  new  spirit  will  I  put  ivithin  you  :  and  I  will  take 
away  the  stony  heart  out  of  your  fiesh,  and  I  loill 
give  you  an  heart  of  flesh."  Ezekiel  36  :  26.  God 
promised  the  Israelites,  his  chosen  people,  that  he 
would  gather  them  out  of  all  countries,  and  bring 
them  into  their  own  land  ;  and  having  done  this, 
he  would  bestow  on  them  a  far  richer  blessing- 
would  do  in  them  a  work,  which  neither  men  nor 
angels  could  perform.  He  would  "  take  away  the 
stony  heart  out  of  their  flesh."  The  ''stony 
heart"  is  a  hard,  insensible,  corrupt,  impenitent 
heart  ;  and  this  God  promised  to  take  away  from 
them.  He  would  do  more.  He  would  bestow  on 
them  a  "  heart  of  flesh,"  a  "  new  heart,"  a  "  new 
spirit," — and  this  language  certainly  imports  that 
he  would  give  them  a  tender,  holy,  and  obedient 
heart.  We  have  passages  of  corresponding  signifi- 
cance in  the  New  Testament.  "  For  we  are  his 
workmanship,  created  in  Christ  Jesus  unto  good 
works,  which  God  hath  before  ordained  that  we 
should  walk  in  them."  Eph.  2  :  10.  This  language 
is  exceedingly  strong.  The  conversion  of  a  sinner 
is  termed  a  creation.  A  convert  is  a  new  creature. 
The  word  employed  in  this  text  to  denote  this  reno- 
vation— "created,"  {ktI^u)  is  employed  to  express 
that  exercise  of  power  by  which  the  universe  was 
brought  into  existence.  Eph.  3  :  9.  Col.  1  :  16. 
No  energy  short  of  that  which  brought  order  out  of 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PK.NCIPLES,  149 

chaos,  can  renew  the  soul  of  man.  That  soul  is, 
in  its  natural  state,  a  moral  chaos — daik,  void, 
formless  ;  and  nothing  but  Almighty  power,  and 
infinite  grace,  can  restore  it  to  life,  light  and 
beauty.  "  God  who  commanded  the  light  to  shine 
out  of  darkness"  must  shine  into  the  heart  "  to 
give  the  light  of  the  knowledge  of  the  glory  of  God 
in  the  face  of  Jesus  Christ."  Now,  I  will  ask  any 
considerate  and  candid  man,  whether  such  language 
as  this,  which  we  have  been  examining,  could  have 
been  used  to  denote  moral  suasion,  without  the  cer- 
tainty of  deceiving  mankind  ?  When  God  takes 
away  a  "  stony  heart,"  does  he  merely  present 
arguments  to  display  the  evil  and  danger  of  sin,  and 
persuade  the  offender  to  abandon  it  ?  When  he 
gives  a  "  new  heart" — a  "  heart  of  flesh" — does  he 
only  use  arguments  to  induce  the  sinner  to  be  peni- 
tent, holy  and  obedient  ?  When  he  creates  a  man 
in  Christ  Jesus — ^makes  him  "  a  new  creature" — 
does  he  simply  address  words  to  the  eye  or  ear  of 
the  transgressor  ?  As  weU  might  it  be  affirmed 
that  God  created  the  world  by  arguments — that  he 
ruled  chaos  by  persuasion.  It  is  true,  "  God  saidj 
Let  there  be  light :  and  there  was  light."  But  let 
no  one  suppose  that  light  was  the  product  of  the 
words  spoken. 

If  language  is  not  ascribed  to  God  in  the  act  of 
creation,  as  the  mere  drapery  of  the  narrative,  it 
was  uttered  by  him  as  the  signal  for  tlie  exercise  of 


150  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

his  creative  energy.  Christ,  while  on  earth,  spake 
to  those  whom  he  healed  ;  but  they  were  healed,  not 
by  his  words,  but  by  his  power.  "  The  power  of 
the  Lord  was  present  to  heal  them.''  Luke  5  :  17. 
"  He — the  Lord — hath  made  the  earth  hy  Ms  power 
he  hath  established  the  world  by  his  wisdom,  and 
hath  stretched  out  the  heavens  by  his  discretion." 
Jer.  10  :  12. 

Conversion  is  described  as  a  resurrection  from  the 
dead.  "But  God,  wJio  is  rich  in  mercy,  for  his 
great  love  wherewith  he  loved  us,  even  when  we  icere 
dead  in  sins,  hath  quickened  us  together  with  Christ, 
(hy  grace  are  ye  saved)."  Eph.  2  :  4,  5.  The 
Ephesians  "  were  by  nature  the  children  of  wrath, 
even  as  others."  v.  3.  Their  moral  condition  is  de- 
scribed by  the  phrase  "  dead  in  sins" — a  most 
expressive  phrase,  which  can  mean  nothing  less  than 
that  they  were  destitute  of  spiritual  life  or  holiness, 
and  were  morally  corrupt  and  helpless.  From  them- 
selves there  was  no  hope.  Their  deliverance  was 
from  God.  It  originated  in  his  "  rich  mercy,"  and 
"  great  love."  In  executing  the  gracious  scheme 
of  their  salvation,  he  "  quickened"  them,  raised 
them  from  their  death  in  sin,  or  infused  into  them 
spiritual  life.  This  he  did  not  merely  by  arguments 
or  persuasion,  but  by  the  energy  which  raised  Christ 
from  the  dead.  They  were  quickened  "  together 
with  Christ."  He  was  raised  from  the  dead  to  secure 
salvation  to  all  who  should  believe  in  hira.     Rom, 


CAMPBELLISM   TX    ITS    PRINCIPLES  151 

4  :  25.  As  he  watf  raised  from  a  natural  death,  so 
they,  in  virtue  of  his  resurrection,  were  raised  from 
a  moral  death,  or  a  death  in  sin.  And  that  the 
Ephesians  were  quickened  hj  the  same  power  that 
raised  Christ  from  the  dead,  is  clear  from  the  con- 
text. The  Apostle  prayed  "  the  Father  of  glory" 
for  them,  that  they  might  know,  "  what  is  the 
exceeding  greatness  of  his  power  to  us-ward  who 
believe,  according  to  the  working  of  his  mighty 
power,  which  he  wrought  in  Christ,  when  he  raised 
him  from  the  dead,"  &c.  1  :  19,  20.  Here  it  is 
plainly  affirmed  that  they  believed  "  according  to 
the  working  of  his  (God's)  mighty  power  which  he 
wrought  in  Christ,  when  he  raised  him  from  the 
dead."  The  passage  is  thus  paraphrased  by  Dr. 
McKnight,  who  cannot  be  justly  suspected  of  an 
improper  bias  towards  spiritual  influence.  That  ye 
may  know  "  what  is  the  exceeding  greatness  of  his 
power,  loith  relation  to  us  Jews  and  Gentiles  luho 
believe,  in  making  us  alive  from  our  trespasses  and 
sins,  (chap.  2  :.  5)  and  in  raising  us  at  the  last  day 
from  the  dead,  to  enjoy  the  glories  of  his  inheritance, 
by  an  exertion  similar  to  the  inworking  of  the  strength 
of  his  force,  which  he  exerted  in  Christ,  when  he 
raised  him  from  the  dead,"  &c.  If  the  power  that 
raised  up  Christ  from  the  dead  was  exerted  in 
quickening  the  Ephesians,  then  it  is  obvious  that 
they  were  not  converted  by  the  mere  power  of 
words. 


152  CA.MPBELLISM   IN    ITS   PRINv^IPLES. 

Before  I  proceed,  I  must  meet  an  objection  to 
tlie  direct  proofs  which  I  have  offered  in  support 
of  the  efficient  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  conver- 
sion. It  will  not  be  denied  by  those  who  advocate 
the  theory  which  I  am  combating,  that  believers  are 
"  born  of  the  Spirit/'  "  quickened,"  "  created  in 
Christ  Jesus,"  at  least  after  baptism.  But  they 
maintain  that  the  Holy  Spirit  having  indited  the 
Word,  and  confirmed  it  by  signs  and  miracles — and 
having  pat  forth  all  its  converting  power  in  the 
arguments  which  it  contains — that  now  whatsoever 
is  done  by  the  Word  is  done  by  the  Spirit.  Men 
are  regenerated,  created  anew,  quickened,  by  the 
arguments  or  motives  presented  to  their  minds  in 
the  written  Word,  precisely  as  a  congregation  a  re 
convinced,  agitated,  and  put  into  motion  by  the 
words  of  an  orator,  and  whatever  is  ascribed  to  the 
Word  is  justly  ascribed  to  the  Spirit.  The  Spirit 
has  completed  the  instrument  of  conversion — the 
recorded  Word — rput  it  into  the  hands  of  his  church 
to  be  employed  by  them  for  its  destined  purpose  ; 
and  for  all  the  good  which  they  accomplish  by  it,  he 
is  entitled  to  the  glory.  This  objection  is  plausible, 
and  worthy  of  a  careful  consideration. 

It  is  neither  common  nor  just  to  ascribe  to  the 
manufacturer  of  an  instrument  the  work  effected  by 
it.  The  instrument  may  be  good — perfect  in  its 
kind — admirably  suited  to  its  purpose  ;  and  its 
m-iker  may  deserve  high  commendation  ;  but  nobody 


CAMPBELLISM     N   ITS   PRINCIPLES.  153 

would  deem  it  proper  to  give  hini  the  honor  of  the 
work  done  by  it.  Let  me  illustrate — The  architect 
purchases  tools  of  a  manufacturer  :  they  are  of  the 
best  metal,  keenest  edge,  and  most  approved  pat- 
terns— he  erects  a  tasteful  house — Would  any  man 
in  his  senses  affirm  that  the  tool-manufacturer  built 
the  house  ?  A  daguerreotypist  obtains  from  a  fac- 
tory a  camera  obscura,  and  all  the  appliances  neces- 
sary for  practising  his  art,  and  succeeds  in  obtain- 
ing an  accurate  likeness  of  the  President  of  the 
United  States.  What  would  you  think  of  the  fidel- 
ity of  a  reporter  who  should  affirm  that  Daguerre 
had  taken  a  very  exact  likeness  of  the  President  ? 
Or,  would  you  be  more  favorably  impressed  with 
his  discrimination  and  truthfulness,  if  he  should 
publish  that  the  maker  of  the  camera  obscura  had 
succeeded  in  taking  the  picture  ?  But  if  the  man- 
ufacturer of  an  instrument  is  the  agent  who  uses  it, 
then  he  is,  in  the  fullest  sense,  the  author  of  all  the 
effects  produced  by  it.  Whatsoever  is  done  by  the 
instrument,  he  does  ;  and  he  is  justly  entitled  to  the 
credit  of  it. 

Let  mo  now  apply  the  illustration. — The  wiitten 
Word  is  the  instrument,  divinely  fitted  and  appoint- 
ed for  the  conversion  of  sinners.  This  instrument, 
completed  in  the  apostolic  age,  has  been  committed 
to  the  hands  of  the  church  to  be  by  them  employed 
for  its  appropriate  purpose.  It  is  their  duty  to 
translate  the  Word,  print,  circulate,  expound,  and 


154  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

enforce  it,  call  the  attention  of  men  to  it,  and  exem- 
plify in  their  lives  its  efficiency  and  loveliness.  If 
the  Spirit  is  the  Agent — the  all-pervading  and 
mighty  Agent— ;-who  uses  the  Word,  and  the  minis- 
ters of  it,  as  suitable  instruments  for  the  con- 
version and  salvation  of  sinners — or,  in  other 
words,  if  he,  through  these  means,  puts  forth  a 
special  and  s.efficient  influence  for  their  moral 
renovation — then,  in  the  fullest  sense,  and  with  the 
strictest  propriety,  he  may  be  said  to  beget — new- 
create — quicken — the  subjects  of  his  grace  ;  and  he 
is  entitled  to  all  the  praise  of  their  salvation.  But 
if,  on  the  other  hand,  he  has  merely  furnished 
the  means  of  conversion — arguments  to  persuade 
men  to  turn  to  God — and  these  means  have 
been  successfully  employed  by  his  servants,  I 
do  not  perceive  with  what  pertinency  the  strong 
language  under  consideration  can  be  applied  to  his 
agency.  Let  us  recur  to  the  illustration  used  above. 
The  minister  of  Christ  is  an  architect.  "  I  have 
laid  the  foundation,"  says  Paul,  "  and  another 
buildeth  thereon."  The  arguments,  facts,  motives, 
furnished  by  the  written  Word  are,  to  follow  out 
the  figure,  the  tools  by  which  the  builder  carries 
forward  his  work.  Now,  if  the  Spirit  merely  fur- 
nishes the  tools,  and  exerts  no  effective  agency  in 
rearing  the  edifice,  can  it  properly  be  termed  his 
"  workmanship  T'  Mr.  Campbell's  theory  of  con- 
version amounts  to  this — God  furnishes  the  tools — 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   i  RINCIPLES.  155 

we  do  the  work.  The  Spirit  of  God,  having,  in  the 
Old  and  New  Testaments,  spoken  "  all  the  argu- 
ments which  can  he  offered  to  reconcile  man  to 
God,"  all  his  power  "  which  can  operate  on  the 
human  mind  is  spent,"  and  it  now  remains  for  the 
disciples,  unaided  by  the  Spirit,  to  carry  on  the 
work  of  human  salvation.  But  orthodox  Christians 
believe  and  maintain,  that  the  written  Word,  ordi- 
nances, churches,  ministers  of  the  Word,  and  provi- 
dences, prosperous  or  adverse,  are  so  many  means 
through  which  the  Holy  Spirit,  infinite  in  grace  and 
power,  exerts  a  personal  and  efficacious  influence 
for  the  conversion  and  sanctification  of  men. 

"  I  have  planted,  Apollos  loatered  ;  but  God  gave 
the  increase.  So  then,  neither  is  he  that  planteih 
anything,  neither  he  that  watereth  ;  hut  God  that 
giveth  the  increase."  1  Cor.  3  :  6,  7.  The  church 
of  Corinth  is  compared  to  a  field — "  Ye  are  my 
husbandry,"  or  "field,"  according  to  McKnight's 
rendering.  In  this  field  the  ministers  of  Christ 
were  laborers  together  with  God."  v.  9.  In  it  Paul 
•planted.  He  was  an  apostle,  eminent  alike  for  piety^ 
gifts,  diligence,  and  fidelity  in  his  ministrations. 
He  was  an  evangelical  pioneer  in  Corinth.  Acts 
18  :  8.  Here  he  sowed  or  planted  the  seed,  which 
"  is  the  Word  of  God."  Luke  8:11.  Or,  dropping 
the  figure,  he  preached  the  Gospel  with  great  plain- 
ness, pungency,  and  fervor.  In  the  same  field, 
"  Apollos   watered."     He   was   a  preacher  distin- 


156  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PKINCIPLES. 

guislied  for  his  thorough  knowledge  of  the  Jewish 
Scriptures,  the  fervency  of  his  spirit,  the  eloquence 
of  his  address,  and  the  cogency  of  his  reasoning. 
He  entered  into  the  labors  of  Paul  and  others  ;  and 
endeavored  to  irrigate  and  culture  the  plants  which 
they  had  set.  But  Paul,  who  planted,  and  A  polios, 
who  watered,  were  nothing,  entitled  to  no  glory,  as 
"  God  gave  the  increase."  The  text  teaches  that 
the  success  of  Gospel  ministers — even  the  most 
eminent — whether  in  the  conversion  of  sinners,  or 
the  improvement  of  saints,  is  of  divine  influence. 
The  doctrine  is  according  to  analogy.  In  the  vege- 
table kingdom,  God  gives  the  increase.  The  best 
seed,  sown  in  the  best  soil,  and  in  the  best  manner, 
will  prove  unfruitful,  except  God  send  sunshine, 
and  rains,  and  dews,  and  a  suitable  temperature,  to 
give  the  increase.  The  most  skillful  husbandman 
on  earth,  cannot  make  a  blade  of  grass  grow  without 
divine  aid.  "  That  which  thou  sowest,  thou  sowest 
not  that  body  that  shall  be,  but  bare  grain,  it  may 
chance  of  wheat,  or  of  some  other  grain.  But  God 
giveth  it  a  body  as  it  hath  pleased  him,  and  to  every 
seed  his  own  body."  1  Cor.  15  :  37,  38.  It  would 
be  easy  to  show  that  the  same  principle  pervades 
the  animal  kingdom.  We  might  reasonably  infer 
that  this  principle  extends  into  the  kingdom  of 
grace.  But  on  this  subject  we  are  not  left  to  the 
uncertain  deduction  of  reason.  All  increase  in  the 
evangelic  field  is  of  God.     The  piety  and  ability  of 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES.  157 

the  ministry — the 'truth  proclaimed — the  manner 
of  publishing  it — and  the  character  of  the  people 
among  whom  it  is  preached,  can  furnish  no  guar- 
antee of  success.  If  Paul  and  Apollos  were  depend- 
ent on  the  Divine  blessing  and  efficiency  for  "  the 
increase,"  no  minister  can  reasonably  hope  to  rise 
above  this  dependence.  And  if  the  success  of  Gos- 
pel ministers  is  from  Grod,  then  it  follows  that  the 
inspired  facts  and  arguments  which  they  are  author- 
ized to  proclaim  are  insufficient  to  secure  it.  Plant- 
ing and  watering,  figurative  terms,  comprehend 
within  their  legitimate  import,  all  the  uses  that  can 
be  made  of  the  Divine  word — all  the  methods  of 
instructing,  warning,  and  persuading — all  that  can 
be  said  and  done  to  give  efficiency  to  the  Gospel — 
and  yet  something  more  is  demanded  to  secure  the 
increase — even  the  Divine  blessing  and  energy.  In- 
deed, so  powerless  is  the  most  luminous  and  faithful 
exhibitionof  Divine  truth,  without  God's  cooperation, 
(v.  9.)  that  "  neither  is  he  that  planteth  any  thing, 
neither  he  that  watereth."     To  God  be  all  glory  ! 

"  Seeing  ye  have  purified  your  souls  in  obeying 
the  truth  through  the  Spirit,  unto  unfeigned  love  of 
the  brethren,  see  that  ye  love  one  another,  with  a 
pure  heart  fervently."  1  Peter  1  :  22.  In  this 
text  the  influence  of  the  Word  and  of  the  Spirit 
are  clearly  distinguished.  By  nature  our  souls  arc 
impure,  or  sinful.  All  moral  excellence  lies  in 
obeying  the   truili,  or  Gospel,  (v.  25.)  G/^nversion 


158  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRIN\.iPLES. 

is  obedience  to  the  truth  ;  and  sanctification  is  a 
growing  conformity  to  it.  These  positions  will  not, 
it  is  presumed,  l^e  disputed.  The  Gospel  alone  is 
not  sufficient  to  secure  this  obedience,  though  its 
facts  are  confirmed,  its  arguments  are  weighty,  and 
the  motives  by  which  its  claims  are  urged  are  high 
as  heaven,  deep  as  hell,  and  vast  as  eternity.  An 
influence  distinct  from,  and  above  the  truth  is  in- 
dispensable to  the  production  of  this  obedience. 
The  Holy  Spirit  exerts  this  influence  not  in  reveal- 
ing new  truth,  or  creating  new  faculties  ;  but  ni 
disposing  the  heart  to  receive  and  be  guided  by  the 
Gospel.  This  influence  is  particularly  described  by 
the  word  of  the  Lord  in  Ezekiel — ''  And  I  ivill  put 
my  Spirit  witJiin  you,  and  cause  you  to  walk  in  my 
statutes,  and  ye  shall  keep  my  judgments,  and  do 
them:'     36  :  27. 

"  For  this  is  the  covenant  that  I  will  make  loith 
the  house  of  Israel  after  those  days,  saith  the  Lord  ; 
I  will  put  my  laws  into  their  mind,  and  write  them 
in  their  hea7'ts  ;  and  I  will  he  to  them  a  God,  and 
they  shall  he  to  me  a  people."  Heb.  8  :  10.  The 
apostle  is  demonstrating  the  superiority  of  the  new 
or  Gospel  covenant  over  the  old  or  Sinaitic.  Under 
the  old  covenant  God  inscribed  his  laws  on  tables 
of  stone — under  the  new  he  writes  them  "on  the 
fleshly  tables  of  the  heart."  God's  laws  are  excel- 
lent— a  transcript  of  his  own  character.  Between 
the  law  and  the  Gospel  there  is  perfect  harmony. 


CAMPBELLISM    [N   ITS   PlllNClPLES.  159 

The  Gospel  is  designed  to  sustain,  illustrate,  and 
enforce  the  divine  laws.  These  laws,  recorded  first 
on  tables  of  stone,  and  afterwards  in  the  volume  of 
inspiration,  are  worthy  to  be  loved,  and  obeyed  by 
men.  But  in  order  to  receive  a  due  appreciation 
of  them,  and  a  cordial  submission  to  their  author- 
ity, a  new  and  peculiar  process  is  necessary.  They 
must  be  put  "  into  their  mind,"  and  written  "  in 
their  hearts."  It  cannot  be  doubted  that  the  result 
of  this  process  is  a  knowledge  of  the  Divine  laws, 
delight  in  them,  and  a  willingness  to  obey  them. 
This  process  is  above  the  power  and  skill  of  men  or 
angels.  It  is  God's  prerogative,  and  one  of  the 
privileges  secured  by  the  new  covenant,  that  he 
puts  his  laws  into  the  minds,  and  writes  them  on 
the  hearts  of  his  people.  The  law  is  the  stamp 
which,  with  his  own  hand,  he  impresses  on  the  re- 
newed soul — the  soul  renewed  by  the  very  act  of 
impressing  it.  It  is  pleasing  to  find  that  on  this 
point  my  views  are  in  harmony  with  those  of  Mr. 
Campbell.  In  his  Christian  System,  describing  the 
Subjects  of  the  Kingdom,  he  writes,  j.  156, 
"  They  all  know  the  Lord."  "  All  thy  children 
shall  be  taught  of  God."  The  Holy  Spirit  of  God, 
writes  the  law  of  God  upon  their  hearts,  and  in- 
scribes it  upon  their  understanding  ;  so  that  they 
need  not  teach  every  one  his  fellow  citizen  to  know 
the  Lord,  "  for  they  all  know  him  from  the  least  to 
the  greatest."     Now  whether  this  process  of  writing 


160  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    HvlNoIPLES. 

the  law  upon  the  heart,  and  inscribing  it  upon  the 
understanding  is  physical  or  moral,  I  am  not  con- 
cerned to  decide.  All  I  maintain  is,  that  it  is  not 
owing  exclusively  to  the  force  of  argument  in  the 
Divine  Law,  or  Word,  that  this  deep,  abiding,  reno- 
vating impression  is  made  upon  the  heart ;  but  to 
the  inward,  and  effective  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

Before  I  close  this  argument  on  the  direct  testi- 
mony of  the  Scriptures,  I  must  make  a  single  remark 
to  prevent  misconception.  All  those  portions  of 
the  inspired  volume  in  which  conversion  or  sancti- 
fication,  in  whatever  terms  expressed,  is  ascribed  to 
God,  have  reference  to  the  Holy  Spirit.  Ho  is  the 
sanctifier.  In  the  economy  of  man's  redemption  it 
is  his  prerogative  to  reveal  and  confirm  the  truth, 
and  make  it  efficacious  in  man's  moral  renovation. 
This  point  needs  no  proof. 

5.  Tlie  theory  of  conversion  advocated  hy  Mr. 
Campbell^  is  inconsistent  with  the  plainly  revealed, 
and  fairly  conceded  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in 
believers  after  baptism. 

That  the  Spirit  of  God  dwells  in  the  saints,  or 
believers,  as  in  a  temple,  to  refresh  and  invigorate 
them,  to  quicken  their  devotions,  and  to  make  them 
fruitful  in  good  works,  is  a  truth  so  clearly  taught 
in  the  Scriptures,  and  so  generally  admitted  among 
Christians,  that  it  is  unnecessary  to  attempt  to 
prove  it.  I  will  merely  refer  the  reader  to  a  few 
out  of  many  Scripture  proofs  of  it.     Lev.  11,  13. — 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS    PRINCIPLES.  161 

Kom.  8  :  9.— 1  Cor.  6  :  19.— Eph.  5  :  5.— Phil   2  : 
13.— Gal.  5:  22-23. 

Mr.  Campbell  admits,  and  maintains  the  ejEfica- 
cioiis  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  believers — an 
influence  difiering  not  in  degree,  but  kind,  from 
that  by  which  a  sinner  is  converted.  As  this  is  a 
very  important  point,  I  will  permit  Mr.  Campbell  to 
present  his  views  regarding  it  fully. 

"  In  the  kingdom  into  whieh  we  are  born  of  water, 
the  Holy  Spirit  is  as  the  atmosphere  in  the  kingdom 
of  nature — we  mean  that  the  influences  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  are  as  necessary  to  the  neio  life,  as  the  atmos- 
phere is  to  our  animal  life,  in  the  kingdom  of  nature 
All  that  is  done  in  us  before  regeneration,  God  oui 
Father  effects  by  the  Word,  or  the  Gospel  as  dictated 
and  confirmed  by  his  Holy  Spirit.  But  after  we 
are  thus  begotten  and  born  by  the  Spirit  of  God — 
after  our  new  birth,  the  Holy  Spirit  is  shed  on  us 
richly  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Saviour  ;  of  which 
the  peace  of  mind,  the  love,  the  joy,  and  the  hope 
of  the  regenerate  is  full  proof ;  for  these  are  amongst 
the  fruits  of  that  Holy  Spirit  of  promise  of  which 
we  speak."     Chu.  Sys.,  p.  2G7. 

I  do  not,  I  trust,  misunderstand  Mr.  Campbell  on 
this  vital  subject.  He  teaches  that  all  that  is  done 
in  us  before  regeneration — which  in  the  Bethany 
dialect  means  "born  of  water,"  or  immersion — , 
"  God  our  Father,"  not  the  Holy  Spirit,  "  effects 
l)y  the  Word;" — but  after  our  new  birth,  "  the  Holy 


162  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES. 

Spirit  is  slicd  on  us  richly  through  Jesus  Christ  our 
Saviour  ;  of  which  the  peace  of  mind,  the  love,  the 
joy,  and  the  hope  of  the  regenerate  is  the  proof." 
The  illustration  emjjloyed  by  Mr.  Campbell  seems 
to  preclude  the  possibility  of  misunderstanding  his 
views.  What  the  atmosphere  is  to  animal  life,  the 
influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit  are  to  the  new  life. 
As  the  animal,  after  its  birth,  is  sustained  by  respi- 
ration ;  so  after  we  are  "  born  of  water,"  or  im- 
mersed, we  live — our  new  life  is  maintained — by 
"  the  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit." 

But  to  show  that  my  interpretation  of  his  lan- 
guage is  in  perfect  harmony  with  what  he  calls  the 
"  ancient  Gospel,"  I  will  furnish  another  extract 
from  his  writings. 

"  Where  there  is  a  guilty  conscience  there  is  an 
impure  heart.  So  teaches  Paul  :  '  To  the  unbe- 
lieving there  is  nothing  pure  ;  for  even  their  mind 
and  conscience  is  defiled,'  In  such  a  heart  the 
Holy  Spirit  cannot  dwell.  When  God  symbolically 
dwelt  in  the  camp  of  Israel,  every  speck  of  filth 
must  be  removed  even  from  the  earth's  surface. 
Before  the  Holy  Spirit  can  be  received,  the  heart 
must  be  purified  ;  before  the  heart  can  be  purified, 
guilt  must  be  removed  from  ^the  conscience  ;  and 
before  guilt  can  be  removed  from  the  conscience, 
there  must  be  a  sense,  a  feeling,  or  an  assurance 
that  sin  is  pardoned  and  transgression  covered. 
For  obtaining  this  there  must  be  some  appointed 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES.  163 

way — and  that  means  or  way  is  immersion  into  the 
name  of  the  Father,  Son,  ana  Holy  Spirit.  So  that, 
according  to  this  order,  it  is  incompatible,  and  there- 
fore impossible,  that  the  Holy  Spirit  can  be  received, 
or  can  dwell  in  any  heart  not  purified  from  a  guilty 
conscience.  Hence  it  came  to  pass,  that  Peter  said, 
'  Be  immersed  for  the  remission  of  your  sins,  and 
you  shall  receive  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit.' "  Chn. 
Bap.,  439. 

According  to  the  "  ancient  Gospel,"  if  Mr.  Camp- 
bell is  a  safe  expounder  of  it,  immersion — which  in 
the  "  pure  speech"  of  the  Reformation,  is  "  the  re- 
generating act  itself" — is  necessary  for  the  remission 
of  sins  ;  "a  sense,  feeling,  or  assurance  that  sin  is 
pardoned  is  necessary  for  the  removal  of  guilt  from 
the  conscience  ;  the  removal  of  guilt  from  the  con- 
science is  indispensable  for  the  purification  of  the 
heart ;  and  the  purification  of  the  heart  is  an  essen- 
tial prerequisite  of  the  reception  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
Immersion — the  remission  of  sins — the  removal  of 
guilt — a  pure  heart — the  influence  of  the  Holy 
Spirit — and  then  love,  meekness  and  humility,  the 
fruits  of  the  Spirit — is  the  established  order  in  the 
"ancient  Gospel,"  promulged  from  Bethany.  I 
might  notice  many  things  in  this  order,  from  which 
I  utterly  dissent,  but  I  must  limit  my  remarks  to 
the  point  in  hand.  Mr,  Campbell  does  teach  that 
there  is  an  influence  of  the  Spirit,  after  baptism, 
und  the  purification  of  the  heart.     When  a  man  is 


164  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

"born  of  water/'  and  his  heart  is  purified,  then 
the  Holy  Spirit  dwells  in  him,  and  love,  joy,  and 
other  graces  attest  his  presence  and  agency.  All 
that  is  done  in  the  believer  before  he  receives  the 
Spirit,  God  his  Father  "  effects  by  the  Word" 

To  do  Mr,  Campbell  ample  justice,  I  will  permit 
him  to  explain  and  vindicate  his  views  on  this  point. 

"  But  the  Spirit  is  not  promised  to  any  persons 
out  of  Christ.  It  is  promised  only  to  them  that  be- 
lieve in  and  obey  liim.  These  it  actually  and 
powerfully  assists  in  the  migUty  struggle  for  eter- 
nal life.  Some,  indeed,  ask,  '  Do  Christians  need 
more  aid  to  gain  eternal  life — than  sinners  do  to 
become  Christians  ?  Is  not  the  work  of  conversion 
a  more  difficult  work  than  the  work  of  sanctifica- 
tion  ?  Hence,  they  contend  more  for  the  work  of 
the  Spirit  in  conversion,  than  for  the  work  of  the 
Spirit  in  sanctification.  This,  indeed,  is  a  mistaken 
view  of  the  matter,  if  we  reason  either  from  analogy 
or  from  Divine  testimony.  Is  it  not  more  easy 
to  plant,  than  to  cultivate  the  com,  the  vine,  the 
olive  ?  Is  it  not  more  easy  to  enlist  in  the  army, 
than  to  be  a  good  soldier,  and  fight  the  battles  of 
the  Lord ;  to  start  in  the  race,  than  to  reach  the 
goal  ;  to  enter  the  ship  than  cross  the  ocean  ; 
to  be  naturalized,  than  to  become  a  good  citizen  ; 
to  enter  into  the  matrimonial  compact,  than  to  be 
an  exemplary  husband  ;  to  enter  into  life,  than  to 
retain  and  sustain  it  for  three  score  years  and  ten  ? 


CAMPBELLISM    IN   I'i^    PRINCIPLES.  165 

And  "while  the  commands,  '  believe,'  '  repent,'  and 

*  he  baptized,'  are  never  accompanied  with  any  in- 
timation of  peculiar  difficulty  ;  the  commands  to  the 
use  of  the  means  of  spiritual  health  and  life  ;  to 
form  the  Christian  character  ;  to  attain  to  the  re- 
surrection of  the  just ;  to  lay  hold  on  eternal  life  ; 
to  make  our  calling  and  election  sure,  (Src,  are  ac- 
companied with  such  exhortations,  admonitions, 
cautions,  as  to  make  it  a  difficult  and  critical  affair, 
requiring  all  the  aids  of  the  Spirit  of  our  God,  to 
all  the  means  .of  grace  and  untiring  assiduity  and 
perseverance  on  our  part ;  for  it  seems,  '  the  called,' 
who  enter  the  stadium  are  many,  while  '  the  chosen' 
and  approved  '  are   few  ;'  and   many,    says  Jesus, 

*  shall  seek  to  enter  into  the  heavenly  city,  and  shall 
not  be  able ;'  '  Let  us  labor,  therefore,  to  inter  into 
that  rest  lest  any  man  fall  after  the  same  example 
of  unbehef.' " 

What  rehgious  teachers  those  are  who  "  contend 
more  for  the  work  of  the  Spirit  in  conversion,  than 
for  the  work  of  the  Spirit  in  sanctification,"  I  do 
not  know,  I  do  not  think  that  Mr.  Campbell  aan 
name  a  single  orthodox  divine,  of  reputation,  who 
does  not  beUeve  that  the  influence  of  the  Spirit  is 
equally  and  indispensably  necessary  in  conversion 
and  sanctification.  The  question  whether  that  in- 
fluence is  more  needed  in  the  one  process  or  the 
other,  could  have  originated  only  from  such  meta- 


166  CAMPBELLISM  IN   :  IS   PRINCIPLES. 

physical,  vague  and  barren  speculations  as  abound 
in  the  writings  of  Mr.  Campbell, 

But  let  us  attend  to  the  main  point  in  our  argu- 
ment. I  understand  Mr.  Campbell  to  admit  the 
influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit  after  baptism.  "  These" 
— them  that  believe  in  and  obey  Christ — "  it" — the 
Spirit — "  actually  and  powerfully  assists  in  the 
mighty  struggle  for  eternal  life."  This  language  is 
quite  orthodox — scarcely  distinguishable  from  the 
dialect  of  the  populars.  Whether  this  influence  of 
the  Spirit  in  believers,  by  which  they  are  actually 
and  powerfully  assisted,  is  physical,  moral,  or  inde- 
finable, he  does  not  inform  us.  He  not  only  admits 
the  reality  of  this  influence,  but  clearly  states  the 
ground  of  its  necessity.  Conversion,  he  teaches,  is 
comparatively  easy  ;  but  sanctification  is  very  difii- 
cult.  "Is  it  not  more  easy  to  plant,  than  to 
cultivate  the  corn,  the  vine,  the  olive  ?"  "  The 
commands  '  believe,'  '  repent,'  and  '  he  baptized,' 
are  never  accompanied  with  any  intimation  of  pecu- 
liar difficulty."  "  We  rejoice  to  know  that  it  is 
just  as  easy  to  believe  and  be  saved,  as  it  is  to  hear 
or  see."  Chn.  Bap.,  vol.  5,  p.  221.  It  is  quite 
clear  that  for  a  work  so  easily  accomplished  as  con- 
version, no  assistance  of  the  Spirit  is  needed.  '■^As- 
sistance to  believe  !  This  is  a  metaphysical  dream. 
How  can  a  person  be  assisted  to  believe  ?"  "  All 
that  is  done  in  us  before  regeneration,  (baptism) 
God  our  Father' effects  by  the  Word."     But  when 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS    PRINCIPLES.  •  167 

the  siftier  believes,  repents,  is  baptized,  has  a  feel- 
ing that  sin  is  pardoned,  has  guilt  removed  from  his 
conscience,  and  his  heart  purified,  then  "  in  the 
mighty  struggle  for  eternal  life,"  he  will  need  and 
receive  the  actual  and  powerful  assistance  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  "  The  commands  to  the  use  of  spirit- 
ual health  and  life  ;  to  form  the  Christian  character  ; 
to  attain  to  the  resurrection  of  the  just  ;  to  lay  hold 
on  eternal  life  ;  to  make  our  calling  and  election 
sure,  &c.,  are  accompanied  with  such  exhortations, 
admonitions,  cautions,  as  to  make  it  a  difficult  and 
critical  affair,  requiring  all  the  aids  of  the  Spirit 
of  our  God,  to  all  the  means  of  grace  and  untiring 
assiduity  and  perseverence  on  our  part."  Accord- 
ing,' then,  to  the  "  ancient  Gospel,"  conversion  is 
easy,  and  is  by  the  Word,  without  any  assistance 
from  the  Holy  Spirit  ;  but  sanctification,  or  the 
Christian  life,  is  difficult,  and  very  critical,  and  can 
be  carried  on  only  by  his  indwelling,  actual,  and 
powerful  assistance.  From  these  views  I  utterly 
dissent.  I  maintain  that  conversion  is  a  work  no 
less  difficult  than  sanctification — that  the  same 
influence  which  is  requisite  to  nourish  the  new  life, 
was  requisite  to  originate  it — that  a  man  can  no 
more  repent  and  believe  without  the  influence  of 
the  Spirit  than  he  can  love,  rejoice,  and  continue  to 
obey.  I  go  farther,  and  insist  that  the  influence 
of  the  Spirit  in  sanctification  being  admitted,  it 
fullows,  as  a  logical   sequence,  that  the  same  iuflu- 

X 


168  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS    PRINCIPLES. 

ence  is  exerted  in  conversion,  wliicli  is  but  the  com- 
mencement of  tlie  work  of  which  sanctification  is 
the  progress. 

Before  I  proceed  to  offer  direct  proofs  in  support 
of  my  position,  I  must  briefly  notice  what  Mr. 
Campbell  has  alleged  in  support  of  his  views.  This 
may  be  comprehended  under  three  heads — 

First.  "  The  Holy  Spirit,"  he  affirms,  "  is  not 
promised  to  any  persons  out  of  Christ."  This  posi- 
tion I  do  not  controvert.  The  Spirit  is  bestowed 
QH  believers,  in  answer  to  prayer,  to  comfort,  refresh, 
strengthen,  and  guide  them — in  fine,  to  carry  on 
within  them  the  process  of  sanctification.  This 
privilege  is  peculiar  to  Christians.  But  I  do  most 
widely  dissent  from  the  inference  which  Mr.  Campbell 
seeks  to  draw  from  this  position.  His  reasoning  is 
this  :  The  Spirit  is  promised  only  to  believers ;  there- 
fore, the  influence  of  the  Spirit  is  limited  to  believers. 
.This  reasoning  is  illogical.  It  is  based  on  the  assump- 
tion that  God  bestows  no  blessing  which  he  does  not 
promise.  But  this  is  not  true.  God's  promises  are  all 
made  to  believers — to  the  obedient — to  the  holy.  So 
far  as  I  know,  t^jere  is  not  a  promise  in  the  Bible  to 
the  ungodly,  except  on  condition  of  their  repentance 
and  faith.  But  the- Divine  blessings  are  bestowed 
profusely  on  the  bad  as  well  as  the  good — the  dis- 
obedient as  well  as  the  righteous.  Matt.  6  :  45. 
God  has  promised  the  Spirit  of  consolation  and 
eucourafrement  to  believers  ;  but  this  truth  is  in 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS  'PRINCIPLES.  169 

perfect  harmony  with  the  doctrine  that  God's  un- 
proinised,  free,  gracious,  and  sovereign  Spirit  exerts 
a  real,  powerful,  and  creative  influence  in  changing 
carnal,  ungodly  men,  into  humble  believers. 

Secondly.  Mr.  Campbell's  next  argument  in 
support  of  his  views,  is  derived  from  analogy.  "  Is 
it  not  more  easy,"  he  inquires,  "  to  enlist  in  the 
army,  than  to  be  a  good  soldier,  and  fight  the 
battles  of  the  Lord  ;  to  start  in  the  race,  than  to 
reach  the  goal ;  to  enter  the  ship,  than  to  cross  the 
ocean  ;  to  be  naturalized,  than  to  become  a  good 
citizen  ;  to  enter  into  the  matrimonial  compact,  than 
to  be  an  exemplary  husband ;  to  enter  into  life, 
than  to  retain  and  sustain  it  for  three-score  years 
and  ten  ?"  Analogies  prove  nothing.  It  is  easy 
for  Mr.  Campbell  to  furnish  examples  in  which  it  is 
more  difficult  to  prosecute  than  to  commence  an 
enterprise  ;  but  these  examples  are  far  from  proving 
that  it  is  more  difficult  to  continue  than  to  begin  a 
life  of  piety.  Moreover,  the  Scriptural  analogies 
are  against  Mr.  Campbell's  views.  Conversion  is  a 
resurrection.  Is  it  easier  to  raise  a  man  from  the 
dead,  than  to  nourish  him  after  he  is  made  alive  ? 
Conversion  is  a  creation.  Is  it  easier  to  create  than 
to  preserve  that  which  is  created  ?  Conversion  is 
reconciliation.  Is  it  easier  to  reconcile  an  enemy, 
than  to  retain  a  friend  ?  It  requires  the  same 
power,  and  certainly  no  less  an  exertion  of  that 
power,  to  quicknn  a  soul  dead  in  trespasses  and  sins, 


1*70  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

than  to  support  and  nourish  the  new  life.  So  ana- 
logy and  reason  decide  ;  and  nothing  but  unbridled 
speculation  would  doubt. 

Thirdly.  Mr.  Campbell  derives  another  argument 
in  support  of  his  opinions  from  the  difficulty  of  a 
life  of  piety.  "  The  commands  to  the  use  of  the 
means  of  spiritual  life  and  health ;  to  form  the 
Christian  character,  etc.,  are  accompanied  with  such 
exhortations,  admonitions,  cautions,  as  to  make  it 
a  difficult  and  critical  affair."  I  admit  the  diffi- 
culty of  a  life  of  piety  ;  but  assuredly  the  difficulty 
includes  the  obstacles  at  the  commencement,  as  well 
as  those  in  its  progress.  Take  for  illustration  the 
text  which  Mr.  Campbell  has  misquoted  in  the 
extract  above  as  an  illustration.  "  Strive  to  enter 
in  at  the  strait  gate  ;  for  many,  I  say  unto  you, 
will  seek  to  enter  in,  and  shall  not  be  able,"  Luke 
13  :  24.  The  entrance  through  the  strait,  or  diffi- 
cult gate,  the  necessity  of  which  we  are  here  taught, 
includes  conversion,  if  it  does  not  primarily  refer  to 
it.  The  exhortation  was  addressed  to  captious, 
unbelie^dng  Jews,  who  needed  to  commence,  before 
they  could  pursue  a  life  of  piety. 

I  am  now  prepared  to  offer  direct  proofs  in  sup- 
port of  my  position. 

My  ^rsi  argument  respects  the  power  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  It  i-5  this — if  the  Spirit  can  and  does  dwell 
in  believers,  "  actually  and  powerfully"  assisting 
them  "  in  the   mighty  struggle  for  eternal  'dfe" — 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES.  iVl 

then  Jie  can  exert  a  similar  influence  in  enlighteuing, 
quickening  and  renewing  the  ungodly.  Call  it 
moral,  physical,  or  any  other  kind  of  power,  the 
energy  by  which  he  assists  Christians  in  their 
struggles  may  be  exercised  in  giving  sinners  "  re- 
pentance to  the  acknowledging  of  the  truth."  2. 
Tim.  2  :  25. 

My  second  proof  is  derived  from  the  nature  of 
sanctification.  It  is  progressive  holiness.  It  is 
beautifully  described  by  the  wise  man — "  The  path 
of  the  just  is  as  the  shining  light,  that  shineth  more 
and  more  unto  the  perfect  day."  Prov.  4 :  18. 
Regeneration  is  the  commencement  of  holiness. 
Regeneration  and  eanctification  do  not  denote  dif- 
ferent processes,  but  the  same  process  in  different 
stages.  They  resemble  each  other  as  the  child  re- 
sembles the  man,  or  the  dawn  resembles  the  day. 
I  will  .not  now  stop  to  defend  these  definitions, 
partly,  because  I  presume  the  advocates  of  the 
Reformation  will  admit  their  correctness,  and 
partly,  because  I  purpose  in  another  place  to  ex- 
amine more  particularly  Mr.  Campbell's  use  of 
these  terms.  Now  to  maintain  that  regeneration  or 
conversion,  and  sanctification  are  the  result  of  dif- 
ferent influences,  or  processes,  is  about  as  discrimi- 
nating and  wise  as  to  maintain  that  the  dawn  of 
day  and  the  brightness  of  noon  spring  from  different 
orbs.  Conversion  is  holiness  begun  ;  sanctification 
is  holiness  progressing  ;  but  in  both  cases  the  holi- 


172  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS  PEINCIPLES, 

ness  is  of  the  same  nature,  tendency  and  origin. 
To  ascribe  the  commencement  and  the  progress  of 
this  renovating  process  to  different  influences,  or 
authors,  is  as  unphilosophical  as  it  is  unscriptural — 
is  to  adopt  a  visionary  theory,  without  proof,  with- 
out plausibility,  and  without  advantage. 

My  third  proof  is  drawn  from  the  direct  testimony 
of  revelation.  The  Scriptures,  I  may  remark,  in 
general  terms,  ascribe  conversion  to  Divine  agency 
in  language  as  clear,  strong  and  varied  as  they  do 
sanctification.  The  Spirit  that  nourishes  is  the 
Spirit  that  begets  :  the  Power  that  preserves  is  the 
Power  that  creates.  But  on  this  point  revelation 
bears  explicit  testimony.  "  Being  confident  of  this 
very  thing,  that  he  which  hath  begun  a  good  work 
in  you  will  perform  it  until  the  day  of  Jesus  Christ." 
Phil.  1  :  6.  This  "good  work"  is  the  work  of 
grace  in  the  soul — that  process  of  moral  purifica- 
tion by  which  it  is  fitted  for  communion  with  God. 
The  Same  Agent  who  begins  this  work,  in  conver- 
sion, "  will  perform  it,"  or  "  be  completing  it,"  in 
sanctification,  "  until  the  day  of  Jesus  Christ."  As 
Mr.  Campbell  admits  that  the  Spirit  carries  on 
this  good  work,  and  as  Paul  teaches  that  he  who 
carries  it  on  also  hegan  it,  it  follows  that  the  Spirit 
began  it.  By  "good  work"  in  this  passage,  Mr. 
Campbell  understands  the  liberality  of  the  Philip- 
pian  Christians  to  the  apostle  Paul.  To  favor  this 
interpretation,   he    hap     in    his    New   Testament 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES.  173 

abandoned  the  well  established  translation  of 
McKnight,  which  he  professes  to  follow,  and 
adopted  that  of  Thompson,  in  the  preceding 
verse.  Instead  of  "  fellowship  in  the  Gospel,"  as 
McKnight  has  it,  or  "  your  participation  in  the 
Gospel,"  as  Doddridge  renders  it,  he  has  printed, 
on  Thompson's  authority,  "your  contribution  for 
the  Gospel."  All  the  commentaries,  within  my 
reach,  both  Calvinistic  and  Arminian,  are  opposed 
to  his  interpretation  of  the  sixth  verse.  "  Some 
sectaries,"  he  says,  have  converted  this  good  work, 
into  God's  work,  upon  them,  and  have  made  the 
apostle  invalidate  his  own  exhortation  to  them,  to 
work  out  their  salvation  with  fear  and  trembling." 
New  Trans.  Appendix  32.  The  quotation  by  which 
Mr,  Campbell  aims  to  confirm  his  interpretation  is 
singularly  infelicitous.  The  Philippians  are  ex- 
horted by  the  apostle  to  W07'k  out  their  salvation^ 
for  this  very  reason,  that  "  it  is  God  which  tvorJcdh 
in  them  to  will  and  to  do  of  his  good  pleasure.' 
Phil.  2  :  12-13,  or  as  the  passage  is  more  stronglj- 
rendered  in  Mr.  Campbell's  New  Testament,  "  Foi 
it  is  God  who  inwardly  worJccth  in  you,  from  he 
nevolence,  both  to  will  and  to  work  effectually. 
Now  it  is  precisely  this  inward,  effectual  loorJcinp 
of  God  in  the  Philippians,  both  to  will  and  to  ivor\ 
which  the  apostle  styles  "  a  'jood  ivorh,"  and  which, 
he  is  fully  persuaded  God  mill  perform  imtil  the 
day  of  Jesus  Christ. 


174  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

My  last  remark,  concerns  the  honor  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  The  theory  which  I  am  opposing  repre- 
sents the  infinite  Spirit  as  condescending  to  carry 
on,  and  complete  a  work,  which  was  commenced, 
and  passed  through  its  most  difficult  stage,  without 
his  influence.  Man  without  any  agency  except  the 
force  of  argument,  contained  in  the  written  Word, 
is  converted.  He  attends  to  the  Word,  is  enlight- 
ened by  it,  sorrows  for  his  sins,  abandons  them, 
believes  in  Christ,  or  heartily  receives  him  as  a 
Saviour,  devotes  himself  with  delight  to  the  service 
of  Christ,  confesses  him  before  men,  braves  scorn, 
persecution  and  death  in  his  cause,  and  is  baptized 
in  his  name ;  and  then,  this  easy  part  of  the  work, 
•as  Mr.  Campbell  deems  it,  but  most  difficult  accord- 
ing to  the  Scriptures,  having  been  performed,  the 
Holy  Spirit  actually  and  powerfully  assists  him  in 
Ms  mighty  struggles  for  eternal  life.  What  is  this 
but  to  wrest  from  the  Spirit  the  chief  glory  of  his 
work  ? 

Mr.  Campbell,  in  his  great  zeal  to  steer  clear  of 
all  speculative  theology,  maintains  that  all  theories 
of  the  Spirit's  influence  in  conversion  are  equally 
inefficacious  and  worthless.  He  thus  writes — "  But 
who  can  live  on  essential  oils  ?  Or  will  the  art  of 
speculating  or  inferring  ;  or  will  the  inferences  when 
drawn — that  the  Spirit  without  the  Word,  or  the 
Word  without  the  Spiiit,  or  the  Spirit  and  Word 
in  conjunction,  regenerates  the  human  soul  ;  I  ask. 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES.  175 

will  the  act  of  drawing  these  inferences,  or  these 
inferences  when  drawn,  save  the  soul  ?  If  they 
will  not,  why  make  them  essential  to  Christianity, 
beneficial  to  be  taught  ?"  Chn.  Bap.,  p.  269.  I  am 
no  more  an  advocate  of  mere  speculation  and  empty 
theory,  than  Mr.  Campbell..  The  subject  of  the 
Spirit's  influence  has  been  a  fruitful  source  of  profit- 
less theorizing  and  vain  jangling.  I  fully  concur  with 
him  in  the  opinion  that  preaching  the  influence  of 
the  Spirit,  is  not  preaching  the  Gospel  ;  and  that 
much  mischief  has  arisen  from  insisting  on  this  influ- 
ence to  the  neglect  of  the  duty  of  repentance  and 
faith.  But  whether  men  are  converted  by  the 
Spirit  without  the  Word,  or  the  Word  without  the 
Spirit,  or  the  Word  and  Spirit  in  conjunction,  are 
not  questions  of  mere  speculation,  but  grave, 
weighty,  and  practical.  Whatsoever  is  legitimately 
inferred  from  the  Scriptures  is  a  part  of  Divine  reve- 
lation, and  profitable  for  instruction.  The  belief  of 
it  may  not  be  essential  to  salvation  ;  and  yet  it  may 
contribute  to  the  growth,  happiness,  and  eflSciency 
of  the  disciples  of  Christ.  The  influence  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  in  the  conversion  of  sinners  is  not  a 
mere  theory,  but  a  revealed  truth,  the  belief  of 
which  is  intimately  connected  with  the  progress  ot 
the  Redeemer's  kingdom.  The  doctrine  of  the 
Spirit's  efficient  agency  in  the  salvation  of  men, 
teaches  us  our  entire  dependence  on  God  for  the 
success  o<'  our  efibrts — even  the  most  vigorous  and 


176  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITo    PKINCIPLES. 

best  directed — for  the  promotion  of  his  cause.  It  is 
well  fitted  to  impress  upon  the  heart  the  word  of  the 
Lord  unto  Zerubbabel,  "  Not  by  might,  nor  by  power, 
but  bymy  Spirit,  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts."  Zee.  4  :  6. 
This  Scriptural  doctrine  clearly  understood  and 
heartily  embraced,  must  lead  Christians  to  humble, 
earnest,  and  persevering  prayer  for  the  salvation  of 
sinners.  It  shows  them  where  all  their  strength 
lies,  and  whence  all  their  help  must  come.  It  dis- 
poses them  to  give  the  honor  of  their  success  to  its 
real  author,  inspiring  them  with  the  devout  senti- 
ment of  the  Psalmist,  "  Not  unto  us,  0  Lord,  not 
unto  us,  but  unto  thy  name  give  glory,  for  thy 
mercy,  and  for  thy  truth's  sake."  In  all  ages,  and 
in  all  countries,  the  truly  pious,  though  differing 
widely  on  other  subjects,  have  cordially  united  in 
the  belief  and  maintenance  of  the  doctrine  of  a 
supernatural  agency  in  the  conversion  of  sinners. 
Under  the  influence  of  this  truth  they  have  lived, 
their  characters  have  been  moulded,  their  labors 
have  been  performed,  their  prayers  have  been  pre- 
sented to  God,  and  their  successes  have  been 
achieved. 

Much  as  Mr.  Campbell  was  opposed,  in  the  com- 
mencement of  his  Keformation,  to  religious  specu- 
lations, it  was  not  a  great  while  before  he  adopted, 
or  elaborated,  an  abstruse,  metaphysical  theory  of 
conversion.  I  will  not  affirm  that  he  taught  regen- 
eration by  the  W  rd — by  the  force  of  arguments — 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES  177 

without  the  Spirit.  But  if  he  did  not  so  teach,  in 
his  Christianity  Kestored,  then  it  has  not  heen 
taught  by  any  writer  within  the  compass  of  my 
knowledge,  and  I  seriously  question  whether  it  has 
ever  heen  taught  in  the  English  tongue.  Indeed,  I 
do  not  perceive  how  the  clearest,  and  most  discrimi- 
nating author,  who  admits  the  inspiration  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, can  teach  it,  if  Mr.  Campbell  has  not.  Now,  this 
"  inference,"  or  theory,  I  am  very  far  from  deeming 
"essential  to  Christianity,  beneficial  to  be  taught." 
Nay,  it  is  an  illegitimate  inference,  a  false  theory, 
not  "  essential  to  Christianity,"  but  subversive  of  it, 
not  "beneficial  to  be  taught,"  but  most  pernicious. 
It  cuts  off  all  hope  of  divine  aid,  and  all  motives  to 
pray  for  it.  It  greatly  weakens  a  sense  of  obliga- 
tion to  the  author  of  salvation,  if,  indeed,  salvation 
is  compatible  with  the  "  inference,"  and  leads  to  a 
cold  and  heartless  rationalism. 

I  hive  not  yet  entirely  disposed  of  the  subject  of 
the  Holy  Spirit's  influence  in  the  work  of  conver- 
sion. I  have  already  referred  to  the  difficulty  which 
Mr.  Campbell's  opponents  have  found  in  compre- 
hending his  views  on  this  vital  point.  It  seems 
thus  to  have  arisen.  While  he  has  denounced  the 
popular  teaching-  on  the  subject,  us  mystical  and 
pernicious,  and  hae  seemed  most  obviously  to  main- 
tain a  new  and  peculiar  theory  of  conversion,  he  has 
sometimes  published  sentences  on  this  point  to  wliich 
the  most  rigid  advocates  of  orthodoxy  eouhl  lind  no 


1.78  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

objection.  As  early  as  the  year  1826,  Kev.  A. 
BroadduSj  over  the  signature  of  Paulinus,  thus  ad- 
dressed him — "  There  are  some  among  us  possessed 
of  strong  apprehension  that  you  are  disposed  to 
deny  the  existence  of  the  regenerating  and  sancti-- 
fying  operations  of  the  Holy  Spirit  on  the  spirit  oi 
heart  of  man  ;  and  that  you  would  ascribe  all  the 
religious  effects  produced  in  us,  solely  to  the  influ- 
ence of  the  written  Word,  or  the  external  revelation 
of  God.  .  .  .  For  myself,  I  have  said  to  others,  as 
I  now  say  to  you,  that  I  cannot  think  this  of  you. 
/  have  seen  many  things  in  your  writings  which 
appear  inconsistent  with  such  a  sentiment."  Chn. 
Bap.,  p.  266.  We  have  already  seen  in  an  extract 
from  the  Appendix  to  the  Extra  Examined,  pub- 
lished in  1831,  that  Mr.  Broaddus  had  changed  his 
opinion  on  this  point. 

That  I  may  do  Mr.  Campbell  full  justice,  I  will 
quote  from  his  writings  a  few  passages  in  which  he 
appears  to  maintain  evangelical  views  on  the  agency 
of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

"  But  if  any  man  accustomed  to  speculate  on  re- 
ligion as  a  science,  should  infer  from  any  thing  which 
I  have  said  on  these  theories,  that  I  contend  for  a 
religion  in  which  the  Holy  Spirit  has  nothing  to  do  ; 
in  which  there  is  no  need  of  prayer  for  the  Holy 
Spirit ;  in  which  there  is  no  communion  of  the 
Holy  Sjirit  ;  in  which  there  is  n:)  peace  and  joy  in 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   PRINCIPLES.  1J9 

the  Holy  Spirit,  lie  ^oes  me  the  greatest  injustice." 
Chn.  Bap.,  269. 

"  If  any  man  ask  me  how  the  influence  and  aid 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  obtained,  I  answer.  By  prayer 
and  the  Word  of  God."     p.  329. 

"  From  the  answer  above  given  to  query  first,  I 
am  authorized  to  say,  that  '  saving  faith'  is  wrought 
in  the  heart  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  that  no  man 
can  believe  to  the  saving  of  his  soul,  but  by  the 
Holy  Spirit."     p.  353. 

Paulinus,  in  an  article  on  the  influence  of  the 
Spirit,  thus  summed  up  his  argument — "  The  sub- 
stance of  the  leading  sentiment  maintained  in  these 
two  essays  is,  that  we  are  dependent  on  the  influ- 
ence of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  render  the  Word  effectual 
to  our  conversion  and  final  salvation.*'  To  this  the 
editor  of  the  Christian  Baptist  replied — "  Although 
it  might  appear  that  some  of  the  sentences  extract- 
ed from  different  parts  of  the  sacred  volume  were  not 
originally  intended  to  prove  the  position  which  was 
before  the  mind  of  Paulinus,  yet  still  the  conclusions 
to  which  he  has  come  will  be  very  generally  em- 
braced as  declarative  of  sentiments  styled  evangeli- 
cal. If  this  language  does  not  endorse  the  doctrine 
of  Paulinus,  it  is  evasive,  and  unworthy  of  a  candid 
writer."     p.  437. 

"  On  the  subject  of  spiritual  influence,  there  are 
two  extremes  of  doctrine.  There  is  the  Word  alone 
system,  and  there  is  the  Spirit  alow  system.     I 


1§0  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

believe  in  neither.  The  former  is  the  parent  of  a 
coldj  lifeless  rationalism  and  formality.  The  latter 
is,  in  some  temperaments,  the  cause  of  a  wild,  irre- 
pressible enthusiasm  ;  and,  in  other  cases,  of  a  dark, 
melancholy  despondency.  *  *  '^  There  yet  remains 
another  school,  which  never  speculatively  separates 
the  Word  and  Spirit,  which  in  every  case  of  con- 
version contemplates  them  as  co-operating  ;  or, 
which  is  the  same  thing,  conceives  of  the  Spirit  of 
God  as  clothed  with  the  Gospel  motives  and  argu- 
ments— enlightening,  convincing,  persuading  sin- 
ners, and  thus  enahling  them  to  flee  from  the  wrath 
to  come,"     Debate  with  Rice,  p.  614. 

"  I  would  not,  sir,  value  at  the  price  of  a  single 
.mill,  the  religion  of  any  man,  as  respects  the  grand 
affair  of  eternal  life,  whose  religion  is  not  begun, 
carried  on,  and  completed  by  the  personal  agency 
of  the  Holy  Spirit."     p.  614. 

"I  believe  the  Spirit  accompanies  the  Word,  is 
always  present  with  the  Word,  and  actually  and 
personally  works  through  it  upon  the  moral  nature 
of  man,  but  not  without  it."     p.  745. 

I  have  selected  these  quotations  partly  from  the 
early,  and  partly  from  the  later  writings  of  Mr. 
Campbell,  taking  the  liberty  of  italicising  a  few 
terms.  I  could  easily  increase  the  list  of  pertinent 
quotations — ^but  it  is  unnecessary. 

Concerning  these  extracts,  one  of  three  conclu- 
sions is  certain.     Either,  first,  they  contradict  the 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PKINCIPLES.  181. 

quotations  furnished  in  the  commencement  of  this 
chapter — or,  secondly y  they  must  be  interpreted  in 
harmony  with  the  theory  of  conversion  by  moral 
suasion,  which  I  have  already  discussed — or,  thirdhj, 
they  must  be  understood  as  agreeing  substantially 
with  the  popular,  evangelical  doctrine  of  conver- 
sion by  Divine  influence.  And  these  several  con- 
clusions are  entitled  to  particular  attention* 

First. — Are  the  statements  vf  Mr.  Camphell  con- 
cerning the  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit  contradic- 
tory ?  In  my  judgment  they  are.  Whether  his 
views  on  the  subject  were  confused,  or  differed  at 
different  times,  or  were  carelessly  and  vaguely  ex- 
pressed, I  will  not  say ;  but  they  appear  to  me  to 
be  inconsistent.  "  The  only  power,"  says  Mr. 
Campbell,  "  lohich  one  spirit  can  exert  over  another 
is  in  its  arguments."  If  this  is  not  the  "  word 
alone  system"  I  would  gladly  be  informed  what 
that  system  is.  I  rejjeat,  I  must  be  permitted  to 
doubt  whether  any  man  ever  has  taught,  or  ever  can 
teach  the  system,  if  Mr.  Campbell  did  not  inculcate 
it  in  his  Christianity  Restored.  And  yet  he  affirms 
in  his  Debate  with  Rice,  "  There  is  the  Word  alone 
system,  and  there  is  the  Spirit  alone  system.  I 
believe  in  neither."  In  one  place  he  says,  "  Before 
the  Holy  Spirit  can  be  received,  the  heart  must  be 
purified."  In  another  place  he  writes,  "  I  would 
not  value  at  the  price  of  a  single  mill,  the  religion 
of  any  man, — whose  religion  is  not  begun,  carried 


182  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES. 

oWj  and  completed  by  the  piersonal  agency  of  the 
Holy  Spirit."  In  one  he  represents  that  all  that  is 
lone  in  us  before  regeneration,  that  is  baptism, 
"  God  our  Father  effects  by  the  Word  ;"  in  anotbei 
he  maintains,  that  in  every  case  of  conversion  the 
Spirit  and  Word  co-operate,  "  enlightening,  con- 
vincing, persuading  sinners,  and  thus  enabling 
them  to'flee  from  the  wrath  to  come  ;"  and  that  the 
Spirit  "  actually  and  personally  works  through" 
the  Word,  "  upon  the  moral  nature  of  man."  I  will 
not  affirm  these  various  statements  are  contradic- 
tory ;  but  I  do  not  perceive  their  harmony.  For 
the  sake  of  the  argument,  however,  I  will  admit 
their  agreement.     And  now  I  must  inquire, 

Secondly,  Are  the  last  recited  eodracts  from  the 
writings  of  Mr.  Campbell  to  be  interpreted  in  har- 
mony with  the  theory  of  conversion  by  moral 
suasion  ?  Are  vie  to  understand  all  that  he  has 
said  of  the  co-operation  of  the  Spirit  and  Word — 
of  religion  "  begun,  carried  on,  and  completed  by 
the  personal  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit" — of  his 
"  actually  and  personally"  working  through  the 
Word  on  "  man's  moral  nature" — as  meaning  nothing 
more  than  that  the  Spirit  addresses  arguments, 
through  the  written  Word,  to  sinners,  to  persuade 
them  to  be  converted  ;  and  that  having  done  this 
his  resources  are  exhausted,  his  power  is  spent  ?  In 
other  words,  is  the  actual,  personal  agency  of  the 
Spirit,  pleaded  fo'^  W  Mr.  Campbell,  to  be  resolved 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS    PRINCIPLES,  183 

into  mere  moral  suasion  ?  If  so,  the  system  has 
been  already  examined,  and  the  reader  must  decide 
whether  it  has  been  satisfactorily  refuted.  But  if 
Mr.  Campbell  rejects  the  doctrine  of  conversion  by 
moral  suasion,  or  by  the  mere  presentation  of  the 
arguments  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  the  mind,  then  I 
remark. 

Thirdly — That  Mr.  Campbell's  teaching  is  in 
substantial  agreement  with  the  popular  evangelical 
doctrine  of  conversion  through  Divine  injlucnce. 
There  is  no  middle  ground  between  the  "  Word 
alone,"  or  moral  suasion  system,  and  that  which  as- 
cribes conversion  to  the  personal  agency  of  the 
Spirit  through  the  Word.  This  latter  system  is 
the  popular  evangelical  system — the  system  uni- 
versally taught,  when  Mr.  Campbell  commenced 
his  Reformation,  except  by  a  few  ultra-Calvinists, 
and  low  Arminians  and  formalists — the  system 
which  permeated  almogt  all  our  Biblical  and  theo- 
logical literature  ;  our  commentaries,  Bible  diction- 
aries, bodies  of  divinity,  and  popular  sermons — in 
fine,  the  system  which  maintained  a  quiet,  undis- 
puted, and  controlling  influence  in  all  the  orthodox 
churches  of  the  land.  I  must  confirm  these  state- 
ments by  a  few  quotations  from  popular,  evangelical 
writers,  whose  reputation  preceded  the  Bethany 
Reformation,  and  has  not  declined  from  its  influence. 

"  The  instrument  of  this  renovation  (regeneration) 
is  '  the  word  of  truth.'     In  infusing  the  principle 


184  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

of  divine  life  into  the  soul,  God  is  wont  to  employ 
the  Gospel  as  the  instrument."  K.  Hall,  vol.  3. 
p.  66. 

"  The  change  which  God  produces  in  men's  dis- 
positions and  actions,  by  the  truths  of  the  Gospel 
impressed  on  their  minds,  is  so  great  that  it  may  be 
called  a  begetting,  or  creating  them  anew,"  Mc- 
Knight.     Note  on  Jas.  1 :  18. 

"  But  though  this  Word  (the  Gospel)  cannot  beget 
without  him  (God),  yet  it  is  by  this  Word  that  he 
begets,  and  ordinarily  not  without  it."  Leighton's 
Works,  p.  120. 

"  The  Word,  or  doctrine  of  truth,  what  St.  Paul 
calls  the  Word  of  the  truth  of  the  Gospel,  Col.  1 :  5, 
is,  the  means  which  God  uses  to  convert  souls."  A. 
Clarke's  Com.,  Jas:  1 :  18. 

"  In  this  passage  St.  Peter  declares,  that  Chris- 
tians are  born,  or  regenerated,  did  loyov,  by  means 
of  the  Word  of  God,  Of  course  he  declares,  that  they 
were  not  regenerated  without  the  instrumentality 
of  the  Word  of  God.  What  is  true,  with  respect  to 
this  subject,  of  the  Christians  to  whom  St.  Peter 
wrote,  will  not  be  denied  to  be  true  of  Christians 
universally."     D wight's  Theol,,  vol.  4,  p.  40-41. 

"  The  means  (of  regeneration)  are  pointed  out  ; 
the  Word  of  truth,  i.  e.,  the  Gospel  ;  as  Paul  ex- 
presses it  more  plainly,  1  Cor.  4 :  15.  This  Gospel 
is  indeed  a  Word  of  trutl,  ;  else  it  ^':>uld  never  pre- 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES.  185 

duce  sucli  real,  such  lasting,  such  great  and  noble 
effects."     M.  Henry's  Com.,  Jas.  1  :  18. 

"  No  regeneration,  no  quickening  grace,  no  faith 
nor  holiness,  come  this  way  (through  the  law^  but 
through  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel ;  in  and 
through  which,  as  a  vehicle,  the  Spirit  of  God  con- 
veys himself  into  the  heart,  as  a  Spirit  of  regenera- 
tion and  faith."     Gill's  Com.,  1  Cor.  4 :  15. 

"Here  is  a  plain  evidence,  that  the  Word  of  God 
is  the  ordinary  means  of  our  regeneration,  it  being 
*  the  word  preached,'  the  word  we  are  to  hear, 
(v.  19,  22,)  and  '  receive  with  meekness,'  by  which 
the  new  birth  is  by  God  wrought  in  us,  and  which, 
saith  the  apostle,  is  able  to  save  the  soul."  Dr. 
Whitby's  Com.,  Jas.  1 :  18. 

Even  Andrew  Fuller,  who  maintained  a  Divine 
influence  in  regeneration,  "  which  is  immediate,  or 
without  any  instrument  whatever,"  and  in  which 
sentiment,  so  far  as  I  have  observed,  he  stood  alone, 
did  not  consider  this  influence  as  producing  the 
whole  of  that  change  denoted  by  the  term  regenera- 
tion. "  I  admit  regeneration,"  he  says,  "  to  be  by 
the  Word  of  God,  and  that  this  truth  is  taught  by 
the  passage  in  question,  (1  Pet.  1  :  23,)  and  also 
in  Jas,  1  :  18  ;  nor  does  this  concession  appear  to 
clash  with  the  position  above."  Fuller's  Works, 
vol.  1,  p.  666. 

Quotations  of  this  kind  might  be  indefinitely 
multiplied,  from  thr   most  enlightened,  pious  and 


186  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES. 

approved  authors,  showing  conchisively  that  the 
doctrine  in  question  was  generally,  almost  univer- 
sally, held  by  evangelical  Christians,  before  the  first 
number  of  the  Christian  Baptist  saw  the  light.  In 
all  the  "  vain  j anglings,"  to  which  the  speculations 
of  Mr.  Campbell  have  unfortunately  given  birth,  I 
do  not  remember  to  have  heard  but  a  single  indi- 
vidual maintain  the  FuUerian  theory,  that  regene- 
ration is  commenced  by  a  Divine  influence,  "without 
any  instrument,"  and  he  was  an  earnest  and  faithful 
minister  of  the  Gospel,  whose  success  was,  in  no 
degree,  impeded  by  his  peculiar  theory. 

Now  if  Mr.  Campbell  rejects  the  theory  of  con- 
version by  moral  suasion,  and  holds  that  conversion 
is  effected  by  the  personal  agency  of  the  Spirit, 
through  the  written  Word,  then  on  this  great,  vital, 
distinctive  principle  of  evangelical  Christianty,  he 
is  found  in  company  with  our  Halls,  our  Leightons, 
our  Henrys,  and  a  host  of  such  Protestant  worthies ; 
nor  does  he  need  to  be  ashamed  of  his  company. 
On  one  merely  speculative  point,  he  differs  from 
most,  or  all  of  his  brethren.  They  believe  that  this 
is  God's  ordinary,  or  usual  way  of  converting  sin- 
ners ;  the  only  way  in  wliich  we  should  hope,  labor 
and  pray  for'their  conversion  ;  but  that  he  is  not 
limited  to  this  way.  In  the  case  of  dying  infants, 
or  idiots,  they  believe  that  a  moral  change,  equiva- 
lent to  regeneration,  is  effected  by  the  direct,  per- 
sonal agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  without  the  Word. 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES.  187 

They  found  their  belief  on  what  seems  to  thtm  to 
be  a  legitimate  inference  from  clearly  revealed  truth. 
From  this  inference  Mr,  Campbell  dissents ;  and 
maintains  not  only  that  the  Spirit  does  not,  and 
needs  not,  but  cannot  operate  except  through  its 
arguments.  As  this  point,  however,  is  purely  specu- 
lative, and  as  Mr.  Campbell  admits  the  salvation  of 
dying  "infants,  and  idiots,  it  cannot  be  deemed  of 
great  importance. 

Is  he  then  to  be  classed  among  the  orthodox 
teachers  of  a  Divine  influence  in  the  conversion  of 
sinners  ?  It  will,  doubtless,  seem  as  strange  to 
many  as  it  was  of  .old  to  find  Saul  among  the  pro- 
phets. For  thirty  years  it  has  been  his  chosen  em- 
ployment to  denounce,  by  the  tongue  and  the  pen, 
in  no  measured  terms,  the  "  mystic  theology,'''  and 
"  theoretic  doctors,"  and  to  expose  the  pernicious 
effects  of  the  popular  teaching  on  the  influence  of 
the  Holy  Spirit.  He  claimed  to  have  made  dis- 
coveries on  this  subject  of  great  importance  to  the 
world.  His  admirers  fancied  that  he  had  shed  fresh, 
and  most  satisfactory  light  on  it.  They  certainly 
received  new  views  of  this  delicate  and  profound 
subject  from  their  erudite  instructor.  One  of  them 
felt  impelled  to  reflect  the  light  which  he  had  re- 
ceived "  abaut  the  Holy  Spirit's  operations  in  this 
metaphysical  day,"  in  the  following  unequivocal 
language,  which  was  published  in  the  Christian 
Baptist,  "  without  note  or  comment,"     "  We  must 


188  OAMIBELLISM   IN   ITS   PEINCIPLE3. 

first  liear,  then  believe  and  reform  ;  tlien  obey,  that 
is,  be  immer»dd  ;  then  receive  the  regenerating 
Spirit,  with  all  its  heavenly  blessings  promised  to 
the  believing  sons  and  daughters  of  Adam.  This 
appears  to  be  so  plainly  inculcated  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament, that  I  am  astonished  that  I  so  long  re- 
mained ignorant  of  the  Gospel,  when  at  the  same 
time  I  professed  to  be  a  teacher  of  it.  And  for  this 
discovery  I  am  indebted  to  you,  brother  Editor," 
p.  544.  Another  coadjutor,  and  an  accredited 
leader  in  the  Keformation,  thus  wrote — "If  they 
(the  Samaritans)  were  converted  before  baptism, 
they  were  converted  without  the  Holy  Spirit,  for 
they  had  been  baptized,  and  yet-  '  the  Spirit  had 
fallen  on  none  of  them.'  .  .  .  This  passage  (Gal.  2: 
2,)  ought  alone  to  decide  this  controversy  about 
the  work  of  the  Spirit.  The  passages  are  abundant 
which  teach  the  nature  of  the  Spirit's  work,  and  all 
are  like  the  above,  conclusive  as  to  the  fact,  that 
the  Holy  Spirit  dwells  in  the  saints,  and  that  he 
does  not  come  to  sinners  to  convert  them."  Scrip- 
tural Keformation  by  Jas.  Henshall,  p.  23.  But 
this  confidence  that  new  light  had  appeared  f^s,  it 
seems,  illusory.  Mr.  Campbell  believes  as  the  great 
body  of  evangelical  ministers  in  all  the  Christian 
sects,  believes,  that  sinners  are  converted  by  the 
personal  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  through  the 
Gospel.  But,  surely,  since  the  world  began,  have 
there. never  been  so  manj  labored  arguments,  so 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS   PRINCIPLES.  189 

much  learned  criticism,  so  mucli  toil,  debate  and 
strife,  such  a  waste  of  ink  and  'paper,  and  such  a 
multiplication  of  essays,  pamjihlets  and  books,  to 
prove  what  scarcely  any  body  doubted.  The  public 
mind  was  excited,  the  Christian  world  was  agitated, 
the  Baptist  denomination,  in  several  states,  was 
thrown"  into  confusion,  many  of  the  churches  were 
rent  asunder,  a  new  sect  was  formed,  and  the  aid 
of  earth  and  heaven  was  invoked  in  the  contest ; 
and  for  what  ?  Why,  simply  because  Mr.  Campbell 
taught,  what  was  almost  universally* admitted,  that 
the  Spirit  in  conversion  operates  through  the  Word. 
But  what  then  becomes  of  the  boasted  Eeformation, 
of  which  the  pecuUar  teaching  on  the  influence  of 
the  Spirit  constituted  so  important  an  article  ?  It 
turns  out,  if  the  supposition  under  discussion  is 
true,  thal^the  Eeformation,  on  this  important  point, 
is  no  '^^fiarmaltion  at  all.  We  eannot  avoid  being 
remind e'd  of  a  well  known  fable.  Surely,  there 
were  never  in  any  previous  case,  such  sore  travail, 
such  mighty  heavings,  such  piteous  moaniugs,  and 
such  swelling  expectations,  in  a  simple  case  of  abor- 
tion. 

Before  I  conclude  my  remarks  on  this  subject,  I 
must  venture  on  a  conjecture,  which  will,  I  fear, 
v^ftot  prove  very  acceptable  to  Mr.  Campbell  and  his 
-^Jl^mirer.s^-  It-- is   this — When  he    commenced   his 
6areer  as*  a  Reformer,  his  religious  views  were  unde- 
fined and  cni  IV/'   His  first  object  was  to  bring  into 


190  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PKINCIPLES. 

disrepute  the  "  mystic  theology"  of  the  "  popu- 
lars,"  or  "  clergy."  He  found  it  necessary,  for  the 
accomplishment  of  his  purpose,  to  publish  some 
theory  at  variance  with  the  popular  doctrine  of  the 
Spirit's  influence  in  conversion.  This  new  theory 
began  to  be  developed  about  the  year  1826,  and  was 
consummated,  and  fully  revealed,  in  the  year 
1831,  when  Austin  taught  the  docile  Timothy,  that 
"  every  Spirit  puts  forth  its  moral  power  in  words  ; 
that  is,  all  the  power  it  has  over  the  views,  habits, 
manners,  or  actions  of  men,  is  in  the  meaning  and 
arrangement  of  its  ideas  expressed  in  words  ;  or 
in  significant  signs  addressed  to  the  eye  or  ear." 
Christianity  Restored,  p.  348.  But  after  the  Ee- 
formation  resulted  in  an  organized  party,  Mr. 
Campbell,  to  avoid  the  o.dium  of  his  peculiar  no- 
tions of  the  Spirit's  influence,  or  because  he  found 
it  easier  to  defend  the  popular  doctrine,  began 
gradually  to  modify  his  views,  and  to  glide  out  of 
the  theory  of  conversion  by  moral  suasion,  into  the 
doctrine  that  conversion  is  by  the  actual,  personal 
agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  This  modification  of 
his  views  began  to  aj)pear  in  a  discussion  of  the 
subject  with  the  Rev.  J.  M.  Peck,  and  was  still 
more  apparent  in  his  Debate  with  the  Rev.  N.  L. 
Rice.  But  for  Mr.  Campbell  to  acknowledge  that 
he  had  erred  in  the  fundamental  principle  of  his 
Reformation,  and  that  af^er  all  his  wanderings,  and 
denunciations   of   the    "  -lopular  clert^^y,"    he   had 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES,  191 

been  compelled  to  admit  the  truth  of  their  teach- 
ing on  this  vital  point,  would  have  demanded  a 
degree  of  humility  and  moral  heroism,  which  the 
high-spirited  Eeformer  did  not  possess. 

I  do  not  intend  to  impeach  the  motives  of  Mr. 
Campbell.  With  their  moral  qualities  I  have 
nothing  to  do.  Men  are  influenced  by  considera- 
tions of  which  they  have  little  knowledge.  Mr. 
Campbell  has  quite  a  fair  share  of  human  nature  in 
him.  He  does  not  rise  above  the  laws  which  govern 
other  frail  mortals.  I  have  simply,  and,  I  trust, 
kindly  sketched  what  appears  to  me  to  have  been 
his  course  in  regard  to  the  agency  of  the  Spirit  in 
conversion,  and  the  motives  that  probably  shaped 
it,  and  the  intelligent  and  candid  reader  must  form 
his  own  judgment. 

The  Identity  of  Kegeneration,  Conversion,. 
AND  Baptism. 

The  subject  of  Regeneration^  or  Conversion,  is  of 
vital  importance  in  the  Christian  System.  On 
other  points  ignorance  may  be  harmless,  but  on  this 
it  may  be  fatal.  These  terms,  the  former  figurative, 
and  the  latter  literal,  are  almost  universally  em- 
ployed by  theiologians  to  denote  that  moral  renova- 
tion, by  which  fallen  man  is  fitted  for  the  service  of 
Christ  on  earth,  and  the  enjoyment  of  his  presence 
in  heavcn^'^''  On  this  subject  Mr.  Campbell  has  put 


192  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

forth  new  and  peculiar  views.  He  has  written  on 
it  largely.  It  occupies  a  conspicuous  place  in  the 
Reformation  which  he  has  so  zealously  advocated. 
His  thoughts  on  this  topic,  scattered  through  his 
numerous  periodicals,  extras,  and  larger  works, 
would  fill  a  ponderous  octavo.  I  have  endeavored, 
sincerely  and  dihgently,  to  comprehend  his  views  on 
the  suhject,  hut  have  found  it  very  difficult  to  do 
so.  If  they  have  not  heen  obscure,  variable,  and 
contradictory,  I  confess  to  a  want  of  perspicacity, 
which  he,  no  doubt,  will  be  very  ready  to  admit. 
That  the  reader  may  judge  for  himself  on  this 
point,  I  will  present  in  contrast  a  few  quotations 
from  the  accredited  works  of  the  Eeformer. 

1.  "  No  man  believes  more  cor(Jially,  or  teaches 
more  fully,  the  necessity  of  a  spiritual  change  of 
our  affections — a  change  of  heart — than  I  do.  I 
have  said  a  thousand  times,  that  if  a  person  were  to 
be  immersed  twice  seven  times  in  the  Jordan  for  the 
remission  of  his  sins,  or  for  the  reception  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  it  would,  avail  nothing  more  than  wet- 
ting the  face  of  a  babe,  unless  his  heart  is  changed 
by  the  Word  and  Spirit  of  God."  Debate  with 
Rice,  p.  544. 

Now  this  is  quite  orthodox.  No  "  mystic  doctor" 
in  the  land  could  have  discoursed  on  the  subject  in 
a  more  evangelical  strain.  But  let  the  reader  turn 
to  the  Mill.  Har.,  vol.  1,  p.  136,  and  he  will  find 
the  following  language  : 


'  CAMPBELLISM   IN    Ylt   PRINCIPLES.  193 

"  The  sprinkling  of  a  speechless  and  faithless 
babe  never  moved  it  one  inch  in  the  way  to  heaven, 
and  never  did  change  its  heart,  character,  or  rela- 
tion to  God  and  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  But  not 
so  a  believer,  immersed  as  a  volunteer  in  obedience 
of  the  Gospel.     He  has  put  on  Christ." 

"  The  sprinkling  of  a  speechless  and  faithless 
babe — never  did  change  its  heart  ;"  but  what  is  true 
of  the  sprinkling  of  an  infant  is  not  true  of  the  vol- 
untary immersion  of  a  believer.  So  Mr.  Campbell 
seems  to  teach.  But  do  I  not  misunderstand  him  } 
He  shall  have  the  benefit  of  another  quotation. 

"  There  are  three  births,  three  kingdoms,  and 
three  salvations.  One  from  the  womb  of  our  first 
mother,  one  from  the  water,  and  one  from  the  grave. 
We  enter  a  new  world  on,  and  not  before  each 
birth.  The  present  animal  life,  at  the  first  birth  ; 
the  spiritual,  or  the  life  of  God  in  our  souls,  at  the 
second  birth ;  and  the  life  eternal  in  the  presence 
of  God,  at  the  third  birth.  And  he  who  dreams  of 
entering  the  second  kingdom,  or  coming  under  the 
dominion  of  Jesus  without  the  second  birth,  may, 
to  complete  his  error,  dream  of  entering  the  king- 
dom of  glory  without  a  resurrection  from  the  dead." 
Chn.  Sys.,  p.  233. 

Whether  Mr.  Campbell  does  here  teach  that  we 
enter  '*'  the  spiritual  life,  or  the  life  of  God  in  our 
souls,  at"  not  before,  ''the  second  birth,"  or  birth 

from  the  water,'    which  in  the  terminology  of  the 


194  CAMPBELLISM   II"    ITS   PRINCIl'LES. 

l^ethany  Reformation,  means  simply  baptism  ;  ami 
wlicther  this  teaching  is  compatible  with  what  he 
has  previously  admitted  of  the  inefficacy  of  baptism 
without  a  change  of  heart,  the  reader  must  decide. 

2.  "  And  will  not  every  Christian  say,  that  when 
a  person /ee?s  and  acts  according  to  the  faith,  or  the 
testimony  of  Grod,  he  is  a  new  creature — regenerate 
—truly  converted  to  God  ?"  Chn.  Sys.,  p.  259. 
Certainly — I  know  no  one  that  disputes  this  point. 
But  ]S feeling  and  acting  according  to  the  testimony 
or  Word  of  God,  constitute  regeneration  or  conver- 
.  sion,  why  does  Mr.  Campbell  affirm,  as  he  does  in 
this  very  volume,  that  "  the  Holy  Sjpirit  calls  noth- 
ing personal  regeneration  except  the  act  of  immer- 
sion ?"  p.  202.  And  if  baptism  be  the  only  Scrip- 
tural regeneration,  as  he  maintains  in  this  language, 
how  can  he  reconcile  this  position  with  what  he 
teaches  in  his  late  work  on  Baptism  ? 

Among  the  Questions  on  Infant  Baptism,  we  find 
the  following — Ques.  103.  Is  baptism  compared  to 
any  thing  else  in  the  Scriptures  ?  A.  Yes  ;  to  the 
regenerating  influences  and  operation  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  Hence  we  read  of  '  the  washing  of  regener- 
ation,' and  of  the  'baptism  of  the  Holy  Spirit.' 
Camp,  on  Bap.,  p.  431.  But  if  the  "  Holy  Spirit 
calls  nothing  personal  regeneration,  except  the  act 
of  immersion  "  how  can  the  Scriptures,  the  only 
medium  through  which  the  Spirit  communicatea 
with  us,  compare  baptism  to  "  the  regenerating  in- 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS    PRINCIPLES,  195 

Jluenccs  and  operation  of  the  Spirit  of  God  ?"     Ts 
immersion  in  water  an  emMem  of  itself  ? 

3.  "  Now,  as  soon  as,  and  not  before,  a  disciple, 
who  has  been  begotten  of  God,  is  born  of  water,  he 
is  born  of  God,  or  of  the  Spirit."  Ch'nty  Restored, 
p.  206.  "  Begotten  of  God  he  may  be  ;  but  horn 
of  God  he  cannot  be,  until  born  of  water."  Mill. 
Har.  Extra,  p.  30.  I  have  noticed  this  strange  con- 
ceit merely  to  show  how  flatly  Mr.  Campbell  contra- 
dicts it.  Hear  him — "  We  are  not  baptized  be- 
cause of  our  fleshly  descent  from  members  of  any 
church,  but  because  '  born  from  above — born  of  the 
Spirit.' "  Camp,  on  Bap.,  390.  But  if  we  are 
baptized  because  we  are  "  born  of  the  Spirit,"  then 
clearly  we  are  not  only  "  begotten  of  God,"  but  born 
of  God,"  before  we  are  "  born  of  water."  Again,  the 
distinction  which  Mr.  Campbell  sought  to  establish, 
in  the  above  citations,  between  the  phrases  "  begot- 
ten of  God,"  and  "  born  of  God,"  he,  in  another 
place,  thus  earnestly  repudiates. — "  I  would  not 
say  that  Mr.  Eice  has  been  sporting  with  the  cre- 
dulity of  the  audience  in  his  dissertations  on  begotten 
and  born.  Far  be  it.  Yet  really  it  looks  more  like 
an  attempt  of  that  sort,  than  at  any  grave  argitment. 
Whether  we  shall  read^  'lie  that  believeth  that 
Jesus  is  the  Christ,  is  born  of  God,'  or  is  begotten 
of  God,  must  depend  on  the  taste  and  discrimination 
of  the  translator,' as  the  word  is  the  same  in  the 
original  text."     Deba^c  with  Rice,  p.  457, 


m 


196  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PKINCIPLES. 

I  should  find  it  easy  to  increase  the  list  of  seem- 
ing contradictions  on  this  subject  from  the  writings 
of  Mr.  Campbell ;  but  the  above  may  suffice  to  con- 
vince the  reader  that  it  is  difficult  distinctly  to  com- 
prehend what  he  does  aim  to  teach  in  regard  to  it. 
His  views  seem  to  be  unsettled.  What  he  affirms 
at  one  time,  he  denies  at  another.  What  he  insists 
on  in  the  Millennial  Harbinger  Extra,  as  of  great 
importance,  he  summarily  dismisses  in  his  Debate 
with  Dr.  Kice,  as  mere  trifling.  But  amid^he  mass 
of  confusion  and  contradictions,  one  point  is  clear. 
Mr.  Campbell  insists,  frequently,  and  in  a  variety 
of  language,  on  the  perfect  Identity  of  Regeneration, 
Conversion,  and  Baptisin.  It  is,  or  it  was,  an  im- 
portant article  in  the  creed  of  the  Reformers. 

The  substance  of  the  Reformation,  on 'this  point, 
as  developed  in  the  Millennial  Harbinger  Extra,  and 
perpetuated  in  the  Christian  System,  is  this — Con- 
verts made  to  Jesus  Christ  hy  the  apostles  were 
taught  to  consider  themselves  pardoned,  justified, 
sanctified,  reconciled,  adopted,  and  saved. — These 
terms  are  expressive,  not  of  any  moral  quality,  hut 
of  a  state  or  condition. — This  change  of  state  is 
effected,  not  hy  any  change  of  vieios  or  of  feelings, 
nor  hy  faith,  hut  hy  an  act  res'.dting  from  faith — 
and  this  act  is  Immeesion,  called  loith  equal  pro- 
priety. Conversion  or  Regeneration.  But  let  us 
listen  to  the  highest  authority  on  this  point.  '"  What- 
ever the  act  of  fa^'-h  may  be,  it  necessarily  becomes 


% 

CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS   PRINCIPLES.  197 

the  line  of  discrimination  beUveen  the  two  states 
before  described.  On  this  side,  and  on  that,  man- 
kind are  in  quite  different  states.  On  the  one  side, 
they  are  pardoned,  justified,  sanctified,  reconciled, 
adopted,  and  saved  :  on  the  other,  they  are  in  a 
state  of  condemnation.  This  act  is  sometimes  called 
immersion,  regeneration,  conversion."  Chn,  Sys., 
p.  193.  "  These  expressions,"  (immersed,  convert- 
ed, regenerated,)  "  in  the  apostle's  style,  denote 
the  same  act,"  p.  203.  "  For  if  immersion  be  equi- 
valent to  regeneration,  and  regeneration  be  of  the 
same  import  with  being  born  again,  then  being  born 
again  and  being  immersed,  are  the  same  thing."  p. 
200. 

I  may  have  occasion  under  another  head  to  ex- 
amine the  above  system — I  shall,  in  this  place, 
confine  my  discussion  to  the  identity  of  baptism 
regeneration,  and  conversion. 

Before  I  enter  on  my  task,  I  must  submit  a  few 
remarks  to  prevent  misconception. 

Mr.  Campbell  has  been  frequently,  but,  I  think, 
unfairly  charged  with  teaching  baptismal  regenera- 
tion. As  popularly  understood,  baptismal  regener- 
ation denotes  a  moral  change,  effected  through  the 
influence  of  Christian  baptism.  Some  things  which 
Mr.  Campbell  has  written,  as  we  have  seen,  seem 
to  imply  this  doctrine  ;  and  he  has  exposed  himself 
to  the  suspicion  of  holding  it,  by  quoting  its  advo- 
<'iites  in  support  of  his  ppcnliar  views  ;  but  cortainlj 


198  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES. 

he  has  not  formally  proclaimed  it — he  earnestly 
advocates  principles  at  war  with  it.  What  he 
clearly  maintains  is,  not  that  we  are  regenerated  by 
baptism,  hut  that  baptism  is  itself  regeneration,  and 
the  only  '^personal  regeneration." 

I  do  not  charge  Mr.  Campbell  with  denying  the 
necessity  of  a  moral  change  preparatory  to  baptism. 
He  has  written  equivocally,  perhaps  it  would  be 
better  to  say,  obscurely,  on  the  subject.  His  love 
of  novelty,  the  immaturity  of  his  views,  or  the 
blinding  influence  of  his  theory,  or  all  these  causes 
combined,  have  impelled  him  to  record  many  sen- 
tences, which  ingenuity,  less  pregnant  than  his  own, 
finds  it  difficult  to  reconcile  with  my  admission.  A 
pity  it  is,  that  an  author,  destined  to  exert  so  wide- 
spread and  moulding  an  influence  in  the  world, 
should  have  written  so  carelessly  and  confusedly  on 
so  vital  a  subject. 

It  is  also  due  to  Mr.  Campbell  to  admit,  that  in 
the  passages  under  discussion,  he  professes  to  use 
the  terms  Kegeneration  and  Conversion,  not  in  their 
popular,  but  Scriptural  sense,  "  It  is  not,"  he 
modestly  says,  "  the  regeneration  of  the  schools, 
in  which  Christianity  has  been  lowered,  misappre- 
hended, obscured,  and  adulterated,  of  which  we  are 
to  write  ;  but  that  regeneration  of  which  Jesus 
spoke,  and  the  apostles  wrote,"  Chn'ty  Kestored, 
p.  257.  It  is  to  displace  the  '"'  jargon  of  the  schools," 
by  a    "  pure    speech,"   that   Mr.    Campbell  would 


CAMPBELLISM*  IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES.  199 

have  us  to  confound  regeneration,  baptism  and  con- 
version. 

Having  made  these  preliminary  remarks,  I  now 
take  issue  with  the  Bethany  Keformer  on  the  Iden- 
tity of  BajDtisnij  Regeneration^  and  Conversion.  I 
maintain  that  neither  the  term  regeneration,  nor 
conversion,  nor  any  equivalent  term,  nor  the  Greek 
words  wliich  they  properly  represent,  nor  any  of 
their  cognates,  are  ever  used  in  the  Scriptures  to 
denote  baptism. 

Regeneration. — This  term  as  it  has  been  already 
remarked,  which  is  usually  employed  by  theologians 
to  denote  that  moral  change  by  which  man  is  fitted 
for  the  enjoyment  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  occurs 
but  twice  in  the  common  version  of  the  Scriptures. 
In  the  Greek  it  is  TroA/yyevcfftV,  which  literally  sig- 
nifies a  new  birth,  or  creation.  It  is  first  found 
Mat.  19  :  28.  Whatever  may  be  its  import  in  this 
passage,  it  is  agreed,  on  both  sides,  that  it  refers 
neither  to  a  personal  renovation,  nor  to  baptism. 
This  text  has  no  bearing  on  the  controversy.  Its 
last  occurrence  is  Tit.  3:5.  "  Not  according  to 
works  of  righteousness  which  we  have  done,  but  ac- 
cording to  his  mercy  he  saved  us,  by  the  washing 
of  regeneration,  and  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost." 
The  phrase  the  "  washing  of  regeneration,"  or  ac- 
cording to  McKnight's  rendering,  which  Mr.  Cami)- 
bell  prefers,  "  the  hath  of  regeneration,"  is  under- 
sto(4  by  him   to  mQHw  immersion.     ^^  Washing  of 


200  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

regeTieration,"  he  sa,jSj  "and  immersion  are  there- 
fore only  two  names  for  the  same  thing."  Chn. 
Sys.,  p.  200.  The  phrase  does  not  elsewhere  occur 
in  the  Scriptures.  That  it  means  baptism  is  a 
mere  assumption.  The  weight  of  authority  is  in 
favor  of  this  opinion,  and  there  is  no  motive,  so  far 
as  this  discussion  is  concerned,  to  controvert  it. 
The  assumption  is,  however,  subversive  of  the  posi- 
tion that  immersion  and  regeneration  are  identical. 
According  to  the  assumption  it  is  not  regeneration, 
but  "  the  washing  of  regeneration"  that  means  bap- 
tism. Baptism  is  a  ivashing,  or,  if  Mr.  Campbell 
prefers  it,  a  hath,  emblematic  of  regeneration — 
alluding,  as  some  suppose,  to  the  cleansing  of  a 
new  born  infant.  I  need  not  farther  discuss  this 
point.  I  can  adduce  authority  to  settle  this  matter, 
of  the  greatest  weight  with  the  Reformers,  and  to 
which  Mr.  Campbell  will  not  demur.  In  his  Debate 
with  Rice,  he  thus  •  discoursed — "  I  believe  that 
almost  all,  if  not  absolutely  all,  the  fathers,  Grreek 
and  Latin,  used  regeneration  and  baptism  as  repre- 
sentatives of  the  same  action  and  event.  I  do  not, 
however,  approve  the  phraseology  used  by  them  on 
this  subject.  I  call  baptism  '  the  washing  of  the 
new  birth,'  rather  than  the  new  birth  itself.  So  I 
think  Paul  most  learnedly  denominates  it."  p.  544. 
This  point  is  settled.  The  term  regeneration  is 
never  used  in  the  Scriptures  to  denote  baptism. 
Here  we  might  drop  this  subject,  were  it  not  that 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PKINCIPLES.  201 

kindred  phrases,  such  as  "  bom  of  God,"  "  born  of 
the  Spirit,"  "  born  of  water,"  &c.,  have  been  drawn 
into  the  controversy.  It  is  necessary  to  dispel  the 
mist  that  Mr.  Campbell  has  spread  over  them. 
The  Greek  term,  yevvdu,  means  .to  beget  or  gene- 
rate. Its  derivatives  in  the  New  Testament  are 
generally  passive,  and  mean  to  be  begotten.  It 
occurs  in  the  writings  of  the  apostle  John  fifteen 
times  relative  to  a  moral  change.  The  following 
are  the  passages  in  which  it  is  found — John  1  :  13. 
—3 :  3,  6,  7,  8.— 1  John  2  :  29—3  :  9—4 :  7—5  : 
1,  4,  18.  Twelve  times  it  is  rendered  lo7'n — eight 
times  it  is  found  in  the  phrase  "  born  of  God,"  or 
its  equivalent — twice  in  the  phrase  "  born  of  the 
Spirit,"  and  twice  in  the  phrase  "born  again." 
Three  times  it  is  rendered  begotten — and  every  time 
it  is  contained  in  the  phrase  "  begotten  of  God." 
It  is  once  rendered  horn  in  connexion  with  water — 
"  born  of  water."  John  3  :  5.  Twice  the  term  is 
employed  by  the  apostle  Paul  to  denote  the  in- 
fluence which  he  exerted  in  conversion  ;  but  this 
sense  of  the  term  does  not  aifect  the  controversy, 
I  Cor.  4 :  15.— Philera.  10. 

The  phrases  "born  again,"  "born  of  God,"  &c., 
have  been  -universally  considered  by  evangelical 
Christian  writere  as  equivalent  to  a  ncio  7>}rth,  or 
regeneration.  If  men  are  born  of  Gcd  they  must 
be  re-generated.  Even  Mr.  Campbell,  when  his 
system   is  out  of  view,  admits  the   soundness  of 


202  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES. 

this  position.  "To  the  fruits  of  his  labors/'  he 
writes,  "  such  a  preacher  with  Paul  may  say,  to 
Jesus  Christ,  through  the  Gospel,  I  have  regenera- 
ted, or  begotten  you."  Chn.  Sys.,  p.  300.  Now 
that  these  phrases  (not  including  "  born  of  water"), 
all  denote  not  baptism,  or  a  change  of  state,  but  a 
personal,  moral  renovation,  is  clear  and  indisputable. 
To  ascribe  to  immersion  what  is  ascribed  to  this 
divine  birth  would  be  not  only  false,  but  ridiculous. 
"  Except  a  man  be  born  again  he  cannot  see  the 
kingdom  of  God."  Does  baptism  open  a  man's 
eyes  ?  "  That  which  is  born  of  the  Spirit  is  spirit" 
— spiritual,  holy.  Can  such  an  effect  be  ascribed 
to  baptism  ?  "  Whosoever  is  born  of  God  doth  not 
commit  sin  ;  for  his  seed  remaineth  in  him  :  and 
he  cannot  sin  because  he  is  born  of  God."  Will 
Mr.  Campbell  venture  to  ascribe  this  efficacy  to 
baptism  ?  "  He  that  is  begotten  of  God  keepeth 
himself,  and  that  wicked  one  toucheth  him  not."  I 
need  not  say  more  to  prove  that  these  phrases  de- 
note a  moral  change  ;  and  the  pertinency  and  force 
of  the  language  for  this  purpose  every  intelligent 
mind  must  perceive. 

The  phrase  "  born  of  water,"  John  3  :  5,  what- 
ever may  be  its  import — and  I  do  not  think  it  refers 
to  baptism — cannot  by  any  reasonable  construction, 
or  inference,  justify  the  confounding  of  regeneration 
and  baptism.  Admitting  that  it  means  baptism,  it 
is  clearly  distinguished  from  the  new  birth,  or  being 


CAMPBELLISM   IS   ITS    PRINCIPLES.  203 

'^  bom  of  the  Spirit,"  and  to  confound  them  is  not  to 
interpret,  but  to  pervert  the  word  of  God,  and  that 
too  on  a  most  vital  subject. 

I  have  been  greatly  surprised  to  find  on  examina- 
tion with  how  little  caution  and  discrimination  Mr. 
Campbell  has  discussed  the  subject  of  the  new  birth. 
Take  the  following  passage  as  a  specimen — "  Per- 
sons are  begotten  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  impregnated 
by  the  Word,  and  born  of  the  water.  In  one  sense 
a  person  is  born  of  his  father,  but  not  until  he  is 
first  born  of  his  mother.  So  in  every  place  where 
water  and  the  Spirit,  or  water  and  the  Word,  are 
spoken  of,  the  water  stands  first.  Every  child  is 
born  of  its  father,  when  it  is  born  of  its  mother. 
Hence  the  Saviour  put  the  mother  first,  and  the 

apostles  follow  him Now,  as  soon  as,  and 

not  before,  a  disciple,  who  has  been  begotten  of 
God,  is  born  of  water,  he  is  born  of  God,  or  of  the 
Spirit.  Regeneration  is,  therefore,  the  act  of  being 
horn."  Ch'nty  Kestored,  p.  206.  Had  Mr.  Camp- 
bell not  proclaimed  so  frequently  that  his  mission  is 
to  '''  restore  a  pure  speech,"  it  might  easily  be  sup- 
posed that  it  is  to  introduce  an  unintelligible  jargon. 
A  person  is  begotten  of  God,  and  born  of  loater — 
God  is  his  father,  and  the  ivater  his  mother — and 
this  same  person  is  impregnated  by  the  Word.  The 
work  is  begun  in  the  Spirit,  and  ended,  not  in  the 
flesh,  but  in  water.  "  How  can  these  things  be  ?" 
•'  Now,  as  soon  as,  and  not  before,  a  disciple,  wlio 


204  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PRIXCIPLES. 

has  been  begotten  of  God,  is  horn  of  loater,  he  is 
horn  of  God."  With  equal  clearness,  taste  and 
truth,  might  he  aflSrm,  That  "as  soon  as,  and 
not  before,  a  disciple,  who  has  been"  begotten  of 
water,  is  born  of  God,  he  is  born  of  w^ater.  Nay, 
the  language  would  seem  to  be  more  in  harmony 
with  his  system.  "  In  every  place  where  the^  water 
and  the  Spirit  are  spoken  of,  the  luater  stands  firsts 
It  is  not  easy  to  say  whether  this  jargon  partakes 
more  of  the  ridiculous  or  of  the  blasphemous  ;  yet, 
doubtless,  its  author  meant  it  for  sound  theology. 
Now,  the  slightest  attention  to  his  Greek  Testament, 
would  have  preserved  him  from  this  confusion  of 
speech.  He  would  have  seen,  as  he  subsequently  saw, 
and  confessed,  that  the  same  term  is  rendered  in  the 
common  version,  according  to  the  taste  of  the  transla- 
tors, begotten  or  born  ;  and  that  all  arguments  and 
deductions  grounded  on  this  distinction  in  the  com- 
mon version  would  be  merely  trifling  with  the 
ignorance  or  credulity  of  his  readers.  And  yet,  a 
large  portion  of  the  sophistry  and  crudities  with 
which  the  Millennial  Harbinger  Extra  abounds,  is 
drawn  from  this  shallow  conceit. 

Before"  I  abandon  this  subject,  I  must  submit 
another  remark.  The  Greek  word  dvayewdu  which 
properly  means  to  beget  again,  or  to  regenerate,  is 
found  twice  in  the  New  Testament.  Once  it  is 
found  in  1  Peter  1  :  3,  and  is  rendered  begotten 
again.     "  Blessed  be   the  God  and  Father  of  oui 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    118   PRINCIPLES.  205 

Lord  Jesus  Christ,  which,  according  to  his  abund- 
ant mercy,  Tiath  begotten  us  again  unto  a  lively 
hope,"  &c.  It  occurs  again  in  the  23d  verse  of  the 
same  chapter,  and  is  rendered  in  the  common  ver- 
sion born  again,  and  by  Doctors  Doddridge  and 
McKnight,  with  the  sanction  of  Mr.  Campbell,  in 
his  New  Testament,  regenerated.  "  Being  born 
again,"  or  "  regenerated,  not  of  corruptible  seed, 
but  of  incorruptible,  by  the  word  of  God,"  &c. 
Now,  it  is  clear  and  unquestioned  that  both  these 
texts  have  reference,  not  to  baptism,  but  to  a  per- 
gonal and  moral  renovation. 

I  have  now  shown  that  there  is  not  the  shadow 
of  authority  in  the  language  of  Christ,  or  his  apos- 
tles, for  confounding  regeneration  and  baptism. 
They  are  totally  distinct  in  their  nature,  design,  and 
effects,  as  can  be  easily  demonstrated. 

Conversion, — The  Greek  word,  i-Larpi<pOj  which 
means  simply  to  turn,  occurs  with  its  variations,  in 
the  New  Testament,  thirty-nine  times,  and  nineteen 
times,  if  I  mistake  not,  it  refers  to  a  moral  change, 
total  or  partial,  or  to  what  theologians  term  conver- 
sioti  ;  but  never  to  immersion.  That  the  reader 
may  form  his  own  judgment  on  this  subject,  I  will 
cite  the  passages  in  which  the  term  is  found.  Mat. 
13  :  15— Mar.  4  :  12— Luke  1  :  16,  17  ;  22  :  32'— 
John  12  :  40— Acts  3  :  19  ;  9  :  35  ;  11  :  21  ;  14 : 
15  ;  1^  :  19  ;  2G  :  18,  20  ;  28 :  27—2  Cor.  3  :  16— 
1  Thess.  1  :   9— Jas.  5  :    19,  20—1  Pet.  2  :    25 


206  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES. 

The  noun,  enLarfjuiprj^  is  used  but  once,  (Acts  15  :  3) 
and  is  properly  rendered  conversion.  That  these 
terms  denote  a  moral  renovation — the  turning  of  a 
man,  soul  and  body,  to  God — the  evidence  seems 
complete.  "  When  thou  art  converted,  strengthen 
thy  brethren."  "  A  great  number  believed  and 
turned  unto  the  Lord."  "  Brethren,  if  any  of  you 
do  err  from  the  truth,  and  one  convert  him  ;  let  him 
know,  that  he  which  converteth  a  sinner  from  the  error 
of  his  way,  shall  save  a  soul  from  death,"  &c.  That 
the  word  in  these  passages  denotes,  not  the  act  of 
immersion,  but  a  hearty  turning  from  sin  to  God,  or 
from  error  to  rectitude,  the  intelligent  reader  needs 
no  proof.  And  what  the  term  means  in  these  texts, 
it  uniformly  means  in  the  places  where  it  refers  to 
man's  moral  change.  Yet,  read  what  Mr.  Camp- 
bell pens  in  the  face  of  these  truths.  ''  Conversion 
is  on  all  sides,  understood  to  be  a  turning  to  God." 
Very  well  !  .  .  .  "  Here  it  is  worthy  of  notice,  that 
the  apostles,  in  all  their  speeches  and  replies  to  in- 
terrogatories, never  commanded  an  inquirer  to  pray, 
read,  or  sing,  as  preliminary  to  his  coming,  hut 
always  commanded  and  proclaimed  immersion  as 
the  first  duty,  or  the  first  thing  to  he  done,  after  a 
helief  of  testimony."  The  sincere  "belief  of  testi 
raony,"  or  faith  in  Christ,  necessarily  implies  con- 
version, or  "  coming  to  God."  It  is  essential  to  the 
act,  and  inseparable  from  it.  So  an  apostle  teaches, 
"  Whosoever  believeth  tlat  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  is 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES  207 

born  of  God,"  and  consequently  converted.  Now, 
it  would  have  been  strange,  indeed,  if  the  apostles 
had  commanded  an  inquirer  to  "  pray,  read,  or  sing, 
as  preliminary"  to  that  which  had  been  already  done. 
If  when  Mr.  Campbell  affirms  that  the  apostles  pro- 
claimed "  immersion  as  the  first  duty,  aft  r  a  hcVuf  of 
testimony"  he  means  that  baptism  is  the  first  insti- 
tution in  which  the  believer  is  required  to  make  a 
public  confession  of  Christ,  I  agree  with  him.  It 
does  not  follow,  however,  from  this  position,  that 
there  may  not  be  other,  and  important  duties  incum- 
bent on  a  believer  previously  to  baptism.  "  Hence," 
continues  the  Reformer,  "  neither  praying,  singing, 
reading,  repenting,  sorrowing,  resolving,  nor  waiting 
to  be  better,  was  the  converting  act."  Perhaps  not  ! 
Conversion,  or  turning  to  God,  is  necessarily  a  com- 
plex exercise,  comprehending  that  scries  of  inward 
conflicts  usually  termed  experience.  Mr.  Campbell 
continues — "  Immersion  alone  was  that  act  of  turn- 
ing to  God."  A  more  gratuitous  assumption  was 
never  penned.  It  sets  at  naught  the  laws  of  philology 
and  the  teaching  of  revelation.  Keither  godly  sorrow, 
repentance  unto  salvation,  faith  that  works  by  love, 
nor  a  readiness  to  suffer  martyrdom  for  Christ,  nor 
all  these  together  constitute  conversion  ;  but  im- 
mersion alone  J  (I  give  his  own  emphasis)  is  the  act 
of  turning  to  God,  Let  us  hear  him  again.  .  .  . 
"  From  the  day  of  Pentecost,  to  the  final  Amen  in 
the  revclrt'iou  of  Jesus  Christ,  no  person  was  said 


208  CAMPBELLISM    IN   ITS    PRINCIPLES, 

to  be  converted,  or  to  turn  to  God,  until  lie  was 
buried  in,  and  raised  up  out  of  the  water."  Chn. 
Sys.,  p.  209.  Suppose  I  admit  this  position,  is  it 
""possible  tbat  the  astute  Eeformer  does  not  perceive 
that  his  reasoning  is  illogical  ?  Thus  he  reasons — 
None  were  said  to  be  converted  who  were  not  im- 
mersed— CTgo^  immersion — immersioJi  alone,  is  the 
converting  act.  Let  us  try  the  force  of  this  reason- 
ing in  another  case.  "  From  the  day  of  Pentecost 
•to  the  final  Amen  in  the  revelation  of  Jesus  Christ, 
no  person  was  said  to  be"  Jioly  "  until  he  was  buried 
in  and  raised  out  of  the  wate-r,"  ergo,  immersion  and 
holiness  are  identical.  But  I  will  furnish  a  more 
carefully  fortified  illustration  of  this  argument. 
"  From  the  day  of  Pentecost  to  the  final  Amen  in 
the  revelation  of  Jesus  Christ,  no  person  w^as  said 
to"  helieve  in  Christ,  who  had  not  been  immersed. 
So  Mr.  Campbell  testifies.  "  The  apostle — never 
supposes  such  a  case  as  is  often  before  our  minds — 
a  believing  unbaptized  man.  Such  a  being  could 
not  have  been  found  in  the  whole  apostolic  age." 
Debate  with  Rice,  p.  509. — Ergo,  "  immersion 
alone"  is  the  act  of  believing.  The  conclusion  fol- 
lows irresistibly,  according  to  the  principles  of  Mr. 
Campbell's  logic. 

It  is  no  part  of  my  purpose  to  reconcile  the  as- 
sertion that  "  a  believir.g  unbaptized  man"  "  could 
not  have  been  found  in  the  whole  apostolic  age," 
with  the  acknowledged  tri   h  that  faith  was  a  pre- 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   PRINCIPLES.  209 

requisite  to  baptism,  that  tlie  Ethiopian  treasurer 
confessed  his  faith  in  Christ,  previously  to  his  "bap- 
tism, and  that  "  many  of  the  Corinthians,  hearing, 
believed,  and  were  baptized."  I  will  leave  this  for 
Mr.  Campbell  to  do — a  task  for  -which  his  ingenuity 
eminently  fits  him. 

I  will  now  notice  Mr.  Campbell's  chief  argument 
in  support  of  his  position. 

"  The  commission  for  converting  the  world 
teaches  that  immersion  was  necessary  to  disciple- 
ship  ;  for  Jesus  said,  "  Convert  the  nations,  im- 
mersing them  into  the  name,"  &c.,  and  "  teaching 
them  to  observe,"  &c.  The  construction  of  the 
sentence  fairly  indicates  that  no  person  can  be  a 
disciple,*  according  to  the  commission,  who  has  not 
been  immersed  :  for  the  active  participle  in  con- 
nection with  an  imperative,  either  declares  the  man- 
ner in  which  the  imperative,  shall  he  ^obeyed,  or  ex- 
plains the  meaning  of  the  command. 

"  To  this  I  have  not  found  an  exception  : — ^for  ex- 
ample— '  Cleanse  the  house,  sweeping  it.'  *  Cleanse 
the  garment,  washing  it,'  shows  the  manner  in 
which  the  command  is  to  be  obeyed,  or  exi)lains  the 
meaning  of  it.  Thus,  '  Convert  (or  disciple)  tJie 
nations,  immersing  them,  aid  teaching  them  to  ob- 
serve,' &c.,  expresses  the  manner  in  which  the 
command  is  to  be  obeyed. 

If  the  Apostles  had  onlj  preached  and  not  im- 
mersed, they  wonl  \  not  have  converted  the  hearers 


210  CAMPBELLISM    IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES 

according  to  tlie  commission  :  and  if  they  had  im- 
mersed, and  not  taught  them  to  observe  the  com- 
mands of  the  Saviour,  they  would  have  been  trans- 
gressors. A  disciple,  then,  according  to  the  com- 
mission, is  one  that  has  heard  the  Gospel,  believed 
it,  and  been  immersed.  A  disciple,  indeed,  is  one 
that  continues  in  keeping  the  commandments  of 
Jesus," 

The  principle  of  construction,  so  warmly  advo- 
cated by  Mr.  Campbell,  is  simply  this — Active  par- 
ticijjles,  when  united  wi^h  a  command,  invariably 
express  the  meaning  of  the  command,  or  the  man- 
ner of  obeying  it. 

Let  us  observe  the  influence  of  this  principle  in 
the  interpretation  of  the  commission.  "  G© — teach 
all  nations," — or  convert  all  nations,  as  Mr.  Camp- 
bell renders  it — this  is  the  command  :  "  immersing 
them,"  &c.  The  active  participle  immersing  ex- 
presses the  manner  of  converting  the  nations. 

This  principle  or  rule  is  assumed  by  Mr.  Camp- 
bell to  be  correct.  He  adduces  the  authority  of  no 
critic  in  its  support.  His  only  argument  in  its 
favor  is  a  string  of  sentences  so  constructed  as  to 
agree  with  the  rule.  It  is  quite  as  easy,  however, 
to  form  sentences  at  variance  with  it  ;  and  it  is 
purely  a  question  of  taste  whether  in  such  sen- 
tences the  imperative  mood,  or  the  participle  should 
be  employed.  It  is  worthy  of  remark,  too,  that  his 
examples,  in   support  of    the  rule   are  all  in  the 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PEINCIPLES.  211 

Englisli  language  ;  and  his  numeious  criticisms,  and 
extended  discussions,  furnisli  not  the  slightest 
evidence  that  the  rule  was  based  on  a  critical  inves- 
tigation of  the  genius  of  the  Greek  tongue,  or  even 
the  slightest  acquaintance  with  it. 

I  will  not  follow  him  in  his  labored  discussions  on 
this  point — I  need  not — I  am  greatly  deceived,  if  I 
cannot  demonstrate  by  a  shorter  process  the  ab- 
surdity of  the  rule  as  applied  to  the  commission. 
There  are  two  Greek  words  in  this  solemn  charge 
rendered  teach.  The  first,  with  which  we  have 
chiefly  to  do,  is  /ladjjrevcare  from  fiaOnreiuj  which  in 
Donnegan's  Lexicon  is  defined,  (''  act,  with  an  ac 
cusative  in  N.  T.,)  to  instruct."  It  may  be  well  to 
examine  briefly  its  use  in  the  New  Testament.  It 
occurs  in  various  forms  in  this  volume  four  times. 
Its  first  occurrence  is  Mat.  13  :  52 — "  Therefore 
every  scribe  which  is  iiaOT)TEvOug,  instructed,  unto  the 
kingdom  of  heaven,  is  like  unto  a  householder,  whicl 
bringeth  forth  out  of  his  treasure  things  new  and 
old."  Dr.  G.  Campbell,  following  the  common  ver- 
sion, renders  it  instructed  ;  and  Doddridge  trans- 
lates it  disciplined.  There  can  be  no  reasonable 
doubt  but  that  the  word  here  means  instructed, 
taught,  well  informed.  It  is  found  again  Mat.  27  : 
57,  where  Doctors  Campbell  and  Doddridge  concur 
with  king  James'  translators  in  rendering  it  disciiih. 
Joseph  of  Arimathca  was  "Jesus'  iiiah'/TEvac,  disciple. 
Joseph  was,  according  to  the  usus  loquendi  of  Christ, 


212  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES, 

aud  of  the  times,  a  disciple  of  Jesus,  without  bap- 
tism, for  lie  was  one  "  secretly  for  fear  of  the  Jews." 
The  word  occurs,  also,  Acts  14  :  21 — "  And  when 
they  had  preached  the  Gospel  to  that  city,  and  had 
liadrjTEvcavTEr  tauglit  many,"  or,  according  to  the  render- 
ing of  Doddridge,  "  made  a  considerable  number  of 
disciples,  they  returned  again  to  Lystra,"  &c.  The 
apostles,  according  to  their  custom,  proclaimed  the 
Gospel,  and  taught,  instructed  the  people, — made 
disciples,  or  learners  of  them — ^hut  whether  they 
baptized  them  does  not  appear.  The  word  occurs  no 
where  else  but  in  the  commission,  where  in  the  com- 
mon version  it  is  translated  teach,  by  Dr.  Camp- 
bell convert,  and  by  Dr.  Doddridge  proselyte.  "  I 
render  the  vford.  /^aOrirevaare  jjroselyte,"  he  says,  "  that 
it  may  be  duly  distinguished  from  '^iSdaKovreg  teaching, 
(in  the  next  verse,  j  with  which  our  version  confounds 
it.  The  former  seems  to  import  instruction  in  the 
essentials  of  religion,  which  it  was  necessary  adult 
persons  should  know  and  submit  to,  before  they 
could  regularly  be  admitted  to  baptism  ;  the  latter 
may  relate  to  those  more  particular  admonitions  in 
regard  to  Christian  faith  and  practice,  which  were  to 
be  built  upon  that  foundation."  Fam.  Expos,  in 
loco.  The  sum  of  the  matter  is,  that  Christ  in  the 
command  employed  a  term,  whose  obvious  import  is 
to  instruct,  to  make  a  disciple,  or  learner,  precisely 
such  as  was  Joseph  of  Arimathea.  But  I  can  fur- 
nish in  suppoi^  of  this  view  h'gh  authority  for  the 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PKINCIPLES.  213 

learned,  and  paramount  authority  for  the  Ecformers. 
In  his  Debate  with  Kice,  p.  367,  Mr.  Campbell 
says — "  The  great  Grotius,  in  his  simplicity,  dis- 
tinguished matheteuo,  the  first  word  in  the  com- 
mission, as  distinguished  from  didasco  the  last  ; 
both  translated  teach  in  this  common  version,  thus  : 
Matheteuo,  says  he,  "  means  to  communicate  the 
first,  or  elementary  principles  ;  then  after  bapftzing 
those  who  receive  these  rudimental  views,  teach  or 
introduce  them  as  persons  initiated  into  the  higher 
branches  of  Christian  doctrine."  "  This,"  con- 
tinues Mr.  Campbell,  "  is  my  view  of  the  passage  ; 
and,  certainly,  it  is  the  etymological  and  well  re- 
ceived meaning  of  the  word,  all  the  world  over." 

I  am  now  prepared  to  apply  the  rule  under  dis- 
cussion to  the  commission,  "  Go,  mafheteusate, 
communicate  the  first  or  elementary  principles,"  of 
religion,  to  "all  nations."  How.?  The  connected 
active  paHiciple,  says  Mr.  Campbell,  points  out  the 
manner  of  obeying  the  command — "  immersing 
them  into  the  name  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Spirit."  Communicate  elementary  religious  instruc- 
tion, by  immersing  the  hody  in  ivater.  Is  it  not 
absurd  ?  But  I  have  not  yet  reached  the  chmax 
of  this  absurdity.  The  second,  as  well  as  the  first, 
subjoined  participle  prescribes  the  mode  of  perform- 
ing the  command.  Let  us  follow  the  rule.  "  Go — 
communicate  the  ^rst  or  elementary  principles"  of 
the  Gospel  to  a'  nations.    How ?    Mirahile  dictu ! 


214  GAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   PEINCIPLES. 

By  teaching,  or  introducing  them,  "as  persons 
initiated,  into  the  Mglier  branches  of  Christian  doc- 
trine." CommuDicate  the  elementary  'principles  by 
teaching  the  higher  branches !  Is  it  necessary  to 
say  more  to  expose  the  fallacy  of  the  rule  ?  How 
incontrovertible  then  is  the  conclusion  of  that  pro- 
found scholar,  and  eminent  critic,  Dr.  G.  Campbell, 
concerning  the  commission,  Mat.  28  :  19-20. — 
"  There  are  manifestly  three  things  which  our  Lord 
here  distinctly  enjoins  his  apostles  to  execute  with 
regard  to  the  nations,  to  wit :  matheteuein,  baptizien, 
disdasJcein  ;  that  is,  to  convert  them  to  the  faith — 
to  initiate  the  converts  into  the  church  by  baptism 
— and  to  instruct  the  baptized  in  all  the  duties  of 
the  Christian  life." 

I  must  furnish  another  testimony  on  this  subject, 
though  pointedly  at  variance  with  the  testimony  of 
tihe  same  witness  elsewhere  given.  "  In  the  com- 
mission which  Messiah  gave  to  his  apostles  for  con- 
verting the  nations,  he  commanded  three  things  to 
be  done,  indicated  by  three  very  distinct  and  intelli- 
gible terms,  viz  :  matheteusate,  baptizontes,  didas- 
Jcontes."  Camp,  on  Bap.,  p.  116.  This  point  is 
now  settled, 

I  must  briefly  notice  one  more  argument  in  sup- 
port of  the  identity  of  conversion  and  baptism.  It 
is  founded  on  Acts  3  :  19.  "  Bepent  ye,  therefore, 
and  be  converted"  &c.  The  argument  is  briefly 
this — Peter  on  tl'O  day  of  Pentecost  preached  re- 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRIKCIPLES,  215 

pentance — immersion — and  remission  of  sins — and 
in  Solomon's  portico,  repentance — conversion — and 
the  blotting  out  of  sins.  Mr.  Campbell  maintains 
that  the  latter  was  the  same  proclamation  as  th( 
former,  conversion  being  substituted  for  immersion 
This  is  a  mere  assumption.  It  is  contrary  to  the 
plain  and  well  understood  import  of  the  language 
used.  The  argument,  if  argument  it  may  be  called, 
is  based  on  a  fallacy.  It  is  this — that  the  apostles 
in  their  addresses  to  sinners  proclaimed,  uniformly, 
the  same  truths,  and  duties,  and  in'  the  same  order. 
Nothing  can  be  farther  from  the  truth.  We  have 
but  a  brief  outline  of  their  discourses  in  the  Acts 
of  the  Apostles ;  but  they  exhibit  the  greatest  varie- 
ty of  topics  and  arrangement.  Their  addresses  are 
all  in  harmony — all  substantially  containing  the 
Gospel — but  no  two  of  them  are  precisely  alike  in 
language,  method,  or  matter.  To  infer  then  that 
Peter  preached  baptism  in  Solomon's  porch,  con- 
trary to  the  plain  import  of  his  language,  because 
he  did  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  is  not  merely  illogi- 
cal, and  opposed  to  the  history  of  the  apostolic 
preaching,  but  is  to  indulge  in  a  license  in  biblical 
interpretation  which  may  lead  to  the  most  pernicioiis 
consequences. 

Before  I  quit  this  subject,  I  must  offer  a  few  re- 
marks on  another  point.  Mr.  Campbqjl  labors 
earnestly  to  prove  that  the  early  Christian  Fathers 
called  baptism   regeneration.     I  shall  not  dispute 


216  CAMPBULLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

this  position.  Their  testimony  seems  to  be  entitled 
to  hut  little  credit.  Their  writings  abound  in 
peurile  conceits,  gross  mistakes,  and  pernicious  er- 
rors. None  pays  less  deference  to  their  testimony 
than  Mr.  Campbell,  when  it  is  not  in  harmony  with 
his  views.  Baptism  was  early  confounded  with  re- 
generation, of  which  it  is,  as  he  teaches  us,  the 
"  emblem."  Camp,  on  Bap.,  p.  430.  The  sign 
was  mistaken  for  the  thing  signified.  To  this  mis- 
chievous mistake  there  is  among  mankind  a  strong 
tendency.  We  see  it  iq.  the  monstrous  doctrine  of 
transubstantiation,  and  in  the  idolatrous  worsliip  of 
the  host.  It  is  disj^layed  no  less  clearly  in  the  un- 
scriptural  practice  of  infant  baptism,  the  absurd 
dogma  of  baptismal  regeneration,  and  many  other 
errors  with  which  the  Christian  world  has  been 
deluged.  I  only  wonder  that  Mr.  Campbell,  the 
Reformer,  the  restorer  of  a  "  pure  speech,"  should 
DC  found  following  this  evil  tendency. 

PRAYER    NOT    A    DUTY    OF    THE    UNBAPTIZED. 

We  have  the  doctrine  of  Campbellism  on  this 
point  in  the  following  extract  : — 

"  No  man  can  have  a  holy  spirit  otherwise  than 
as  he  ]DOssesses  a  spirit  of  love,  of  meekness,  of 
humility  ;  but  this  he  cannot  have  unless  he  feel 
himself  pardoned  and  accepted.  Therefore  the  pro- 
mise of  such  a  gift  wisely  makes  the  reception  of  it 
posterior  to  the  forgiveness  of  sins.     Hence  in  the 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PlilNCIPLES,  217 

morax  fitness  of  things  in  the  evangelical  economy, 
baptism  or  immersion  is  made  the  first  act  of  a 
Christian's  life,  or  rather  the  regenerating  act  itself; 
in  which  the  person  is  properly  horn  again — '  horn 
of  water  and  spirit' — without  which  into  the  king- 
dom of  Jesus  he  cannot  enter.  No  prayers,  songs 
of  praise,  no  acts  of  devotion  in  the  new  economy, 
are  enjoined  on  the  unhaptized."    Chn.  Bap.,  p.  439, 

This  passage  abounds  in  errors ;  hut  I  shall  limit 
my  remarks  to  one — a  serious  one — that  the  unhap- 
tized are  not  required  to  pray,  or  perform  other  acts 
of  devotion. 

This  is  not  a  chief,  nor  a  prominent,  hut,  certainly, 
not  an  unimportant  item  in  the  "  current  Eeforma- 
tion."  It  is  not  directly  expressed,  hut  clearly  im- 
plied in  the  language  used.  "  No  prayers,  songs  of 
praise,  no  acts  of  devotion  in  the  new  economy,  are 
enjoined  on  the  unhaptized."  But  if  they  are  not 
enjoined,  either  by  express  command,  authoritative 
example,  or  fair  implication,  they  are  not  obligatory. 
"  Where  no  law  is  there  is  no  transgression,"  and, 
consequently,  no  obligation.  Error  is  prolific,  and 
always  brings  forth  after  its  kind.  The  error  under 
consideration  was  the  natural  ofispring  of  Mr.  Camp- 
bell's false  views  of  regeneration.  Conceiving,  most 
erroneously,  that  immersion  was  "  the  first  act  of  a 
Christian's  life,  or  rather  the  regenerating  act  itself," 
he  readily  concluded  that  neither  prayer,  nor  any 
other  act  which  implied  spiritual  life,  could  be  de- 


218  CAMPBELLISM    IN   ITS   PKINCIPLES, 

manded  of  the  unimmersed.  This  was  an  article  of 
the  primitive  Campbellism,  often  and  variously  ex- 
pressed. It  has  not,  so  far  as  I  have  observed,  been 
repeated  in  the  later  writings  of  Mr.  Campbell,  nor 
has  it  been  repudiated.  It  stands  among  the  re- 
corded and  stereotyped  items  which  comjDOse  the 
"  ancient  Gospel."  It  may  have,  it  probably  has, 
sunk  into  comparative  forgetfulness  ;  but  I  well  re- 
member that  many  of  the  primitive  Reformers 
heartily  embraced  it,  and  deemed  prayer  before  im- 
mersion as  an  invention  df  the  "  mystic  doctors,"  a 
relic  of  the  dark  ages,  and  a  grievous  innovation  on 
the  "ancient  order  of  things  ;"  an  error,  in  short, 
closely  allied  to  ^^  experience  before  baptism." 

I  do  not  know  that  Mr.  Campbell  would  now 
maintain,  or  that  any  of  the  Reformers  now  em- 
brace, the  doctrine  clearly  inculcated  in  the  above 
extract ;  but  I  must,  in  justice  to  the  system  under 
examination,  briefly  expose  its  fallacy. 

Prayer  has  been  the  duty  of  man  under  every  dis- 
pensation of  religion.  The  obligation  to  this  ser- 
vice springs  from  the  relation  between  the  infinitely 
merciful  God,  and  fallen,  guilty,  and  dependent 
man,  in  a  probationary  state.  It  is  an  essential 
element  in  true  piety.  It  is  the  very  breath  of  spir- 
itual life — a  life  which,  I  have  already  shown,  does 
not  depend  on  the  act  of  immersion,  but,  in  the 
evangelical  order  of  things,  precedes  that  act.  It 
implies  repentancG  fai'h,  and  Scriptural  regenera- 


» 

* 
CAMPBELLISM  IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES  219 

tion.  No  man  can  pray  acceptably  to  God  without 
renouncing  his  sins,  believing  in  Christ,  and  having 
a  new  heart.  And  no  man  was  ever  a  proper  sub- 
ject for  Christian  baptism  who  had  not  been  taught 
to  pray,  sincerely,  and  fervently. 

What  say  the  Scriptures  on  this  point  ?  "  And 
Jesus  spake  a  parable  unto  them,  (the  disciples,)  to 
this  end,  that  men  ought  always  to  pray,  and  not  to 
faint."  Christ  taught  that  men — not  baptized  men 
merely — but  men,  irrespective  of  their  character,  re- 
lations, or  professions — a?Zmen,  ougLt,  are  under  obli- 
gaiion,  to  pray.  Though  the  term  man  is  not  found  in 
the  Greek,  and  the  language  may  be  fairly  rendered. 
It  is  proper  to  pray  ahva7/s,  yet  it  is  obvious  that 
the  common  version  gives  its  true  sense.  Prayer  is 
proper  for  all  men,  at  all  times.  Nay,  but,  says 
Mr.  Campbell,  "  no  prayers  in  the  new  economy  are 
enjoined  on  the  unhaptized"  The  publican  prayed 
in  the  temple,  and  returned  home  justified,  without 
baptism.  The  dying  thief  prayed  on  the  cross,  and 
was  admitted  into  Paradise,  without  baptism.  There 
is  but  one  method,  that  even  the  ingenuity  of  Mr. 
Campbell  can  employ  to  evade  the  force  of  these 
Scriptures.  It  may  be  said,  that  Christ  spake  the 
parable  of  the  unjust  judge,  and  that  the  examples 
of  the  publican  and  of  the  thief  occurred,  before  the 
new  economy  was  fully  set  up.  Well,  I  will  fur- 
nish another,  and  unexceptionable  example.  When 
Saul  of  Tarsus  was  converted,  the  Lord  directed 


220  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES, 

Ananias  to  go  to  him,  "  for,  behold,"  said  the  Lord, 
^^  he  prayeth."  Acts  9  :  11.  It  is  clear  from  this 
Scripture,  beyond  a  question,  not  only  that  Saul 
prayed  before  his  baptism,  but  that  his  prayer  was 
acceptable  to  the  Lord,  and  that  Ananias  was  sent 
to  instruct  and  baptize  him  in  consequence  of  its 
acceptableness  ;  and  this  example  of  acceptable 
prayer  has  all  the  weight,  authority,  and  efficacy  of 
an  explicit  command  to  the  unbaptized  to  pray. 

Baptism  is  the  first  positive  rite  in  the  new  eco- 
nomy to  which  the  believer  is  required  to  submit ; 
and  every  believer  should  yield  to  it  a  submission  as 
prompt  as  his  circumstances  will  properly  allow. 
But  baptism  is  not  the  unconditional  duty  of  a  be- 
liever. His  obligation  to  be  baptized  may  depend 
on  a  thousand  circumstances  beyond  his  control. 
No  properly  authorized  administrator  may  be  will- 
ing to  baptize  him — he  may  be  beyond  the  reach  of 
one — ^the  state  of  his  health,  or  his  want  of  personal 
freedom — and  numerous  other  causes,  may  preclude 
the  possibility  of  his  baptism  ;  and,  consequently, 
the  obligation  to  be  baptized.  But  is  he  not 
required  to  pray,  and  engage  in  other  acts  of  devo- 
tion, until  he  finds  an  opportunity  of  performing 
what  Mr.  Campbell  calls  "  the  regenerating  act  ?" 
To  ask  the  question,  is  to  answer  it.  God  has  not 
made  the  duty  of  prayer  or  praise  to  depend  on  the 
act  of  baptism.  The  connection  is  wholly  imaginary. 
It  has  no  existence,  and,  bc  far  as  I  am  informed. 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    PKIXCIPLES.  221 

aever  had  an  existence,  except  in  the  brain,  whose 
fecundity  has  supplied  such  a  variety  and  exuber- 
ance of  speculations  for  the  pages  of  the  Christian 
Baptist,  and  Millennial  Harbinger,  and  in  the  minds 
of  those,  whether  many  or  few,  who  have,  with  un- 
questioning docility,  derived  their  theological  notions 
from  these  sources. 

THE   REMISSION    OF    SINS   IN    BAPTISM. 

"Remission  of  sins"  is  equivalent  to  pardon  or 
forgiveness,  and  does  not  differ  essentially  from 
justification.  The  phrase  signifies  deliverance  from 
the  obligation  to  suffer  the  punishment  due  to  sins. 
The  subject  is  one  of  manifest  and  transcendent  im- 
portance. Its  claims  to  our  careful  and  devout 
attention  are  commensurate  with  the  value  of  the 
soul,  the  malignity  of  sin,  the  preciousness  of  the 
blood  of  Christ,  the  depth  of  perdition,  the  height 
of  glory,  and  the  vastness  of  eternity.  Our  know- 
ledge on  this  subject  must  be  derived  solely  from 
Divine  revelation.  Whether  God  will  forgive  sins, 
and  if  he  will,  through  what  medium,  and  on  what 
conditions,  are  questions  which  only  He  can  decide, 
and  of  his  decisions  we  can  have  no  knowlcdsrc,  ex- 
cept  as  he  reveals  them  to  us. 

What  do  the  Scriptures  teach  on  this  vital  suh' 
Ject  ?  The  orthodox  belief  is — that,  in  virtue  of 
the  atonement  of  Christ,  God,  freely  and  fully, 
remits  the  sins  of  all  those  who  heartily  repent,  and 


222  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES. 

cordially  believe  in  Christ.     In  no  article  of  faith 
are   those  Christians,  usually  termed   evangelical, 
more  generally  and  firmly  united  than  in  this.     It 
is  the  distinguishing  tenet  of  Protestant  Christen- 
dom,    Mr,  Campbell,  on  the  other  hand,  maintains 
that  penitent  believers  are  forgiven,  not  before,  but 
in  the  act  of  immersion.     "  Peter,"  he  says,  "  to 
whom  was  committed  the  keys,  opened  the  kingdom 
of  heaven  in  this  manner,  and  made  repentance,  or 
reformation,  and  immersion,  equally  necessary  to 
forgiveness.  .  .  .  When  a  person  is  immersed  for 
the  remission  of  sins,  it  is  just  the  same  as  if  ex- 
pressed, in  order-  to  ohtain  the  remission  of  sins.  .  .  . 
I  am  bold,  therefore,  to  aflSrm,  that  every  one  of 
them  who,  in  the  belief  of  what  the  apostle  spoke, 
was  immersed,  did,  in  the  very  instant  in  luhich  he 
loas  put  under  loater,  receive  the  forgiveness  of  his 
sins,  and  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit."     Chn.  Bap., 
p.  416,  417.     I  have  italicised  some  clauses  in  the 
above  sentences  to  draw  particular  attention  to  their 
meaning.     The  believer  in  Christ,  however  sincere, 
and  whatever  may  be  his  moral  state,  is  condemned, 
exposed  to  all  the  dreadful  consequences  of  diso- 
bedience, until  the  very  instant  when  he  is  put  under 
water.     Mr.  Campbell  teaches  that  baptism  is  per- 
fectly useless,  "  as  empty  as  a  blasted  nut,"  to  all 
who  are  pardoned.     "  If  men,"  he  says,   "  are  con- 
scious that  their  sins  are  forgiven,  and  that  they  are 
pardoned  before  they  are  immersed  ;  I  advise  them 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES.  223 

not  to  go  into  the  water,  for  they  have  no  need  of 
it."  Chn.  Bap.,  unexpurgated  edition,  vol.  6, 
p.  160. 

The  doctrine  of  Baptismal  Remission  is  the  main 
pillar  of  Camphellism.  It  was  slowly  and  gradually 
developed  in  the  writings  of  Mr.  Campbell,  as  it 
was,  or  was  supposed  to  be,  disinterred  from  the 
accumulated  rubbish  of  past  ages.  It  was,  at  length, 
fully  revealed,  strongly  stated,  and  defended,  at  large, 
with  all  the  learning,  dialectic  skill,  and  unwavering 
confidence  of  the  redoubtable  Reformer,  in  the  famous 
Millennial  Harbinger  Extra.  This  precious  relic  was 
afterwards  substantially  embalmed  in  Christianity 
Restored,  and  in  the  Christid^  System.  The  Extra 
for  a  time  spread  dismay  in  the  ranks  of  the  "regu- 
lars." Such  an  array  of  learning,  logic,  and  author- 
ity, few  were  bold  enough  to  encounter.  But  time 
tries  all  things.  We  have  grown  familiar  with  the 
Extra.  We  have  seen  many  of  its  positions  suc- 
cessfully assailed.  We  have  seen  the  Reformer 
himself  modifying,  or  abandoning  some  of  his  points. 
The  most  timid  have  recovered  from  their  alarms. 

The  system  of  Baptismal  Remission,  developed 
in  the  Extra,  I  now  propose  to  examine,  with  as 
much  particularity  as  my  plan  will  allow. 

Mr.  Campbell,  after  some  preliminary  remarks, 
presents  and  discusses  his  views  of  "  the  Christian 
institution  for  the  remission  of  sins,'  under  twelve 
proposit'ons.  • 


224  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

The  first  six  propositions  be  engrosses  into  one 
leading  proposition,  in  the  following  words,  viz.  : 
"  The  converts  made  to  Jesus  Christ  hy  the  apostles 
were  taught  to  consider  themselves  pardoned,  justi- 
fied, sanctified,  reconciled,  adopted,  and  saved  ; 
and  were  addressed  as  pardoned,  justified,  sanctified, 
reconciled,  adopted,  and  saved  persons,  hy  all  who 
first  preached  the  Gospel  of  Christ."  Chn'ty 
Restored,  p.  191. 

To  this  engrossed  proposition,  I  have  no  objec- 
tion. I  am  only  surprised  that  Mr.  Campbell  should 
have  deemed  it  necessary  to  encumber  his  argument 
with  an  elaborate  discussion,  of  seven  pages,  to 
prove  what  no  respectable  writer,  Protestant  or 
Romanist,  orthodox  or  heterodox,  so  far  as  I  have 
observed,  has  ever  denied.  Let  the  proposition 
then  stand  "  as  irrefragably  proved." 

But  while  I  concur  with  the  writer  as  to  the  truth 
of  his  proposition,  I  can  by  ifo  means  agree  with 
him  in  his  definition  of  its  terms.  "  These  terms," 
he  says,  "  are  expressive,  not  of  any  quality  of  mind, 
— not  of  any  personal  attribute  of  body,  soul,  or 
spirit — ^but  each  of  them  represents,  and  all  of  them 
together  represefl^;  a  state,  or  condition."  Does  not 
the  word  "  sancUfied"  denote  an  attribute  of  the 
soul  or  spirit  ?  Is  it  not  expressive  of  moral  qual- 
ity ?  It  is  generally  so  understood  by  Christian 
writers.  When  Christ  prayed  for  his  disciples, 
"  Sanctify  them  through  thy  truth,"  he  desired  that 


CAMPPELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES.  225 

an  effect  might  be  produced  on  them,  or  in  them, 
by  divine  influence,  through  the  truth,  and  this 
could  have  been  no  other  than  a  moral  effect — the 
imparting  or  increasing  of  some  quality  of  the  soul 
or  spirit.  Does  not  Paul  clearly  distinguish  it  from 
justified,  which  means  a  legal  state  ?  "But  ye  are 
sanctified,  ye  oxe  justified,  in  the  name  of  the  Lord 
Jesus,"  &c.  1  Cor,  6  :  11.  I  drop  this  subject.  I 
readily  concede  that  the  term  ^^  pardoned,"  though 
not  found  in  the  common  version  of  tbe  New  Testa- 
ment, and  the  term  justified,  deiitte  a  state,  and 
that  the  term  saved  refers  to  a  state,  as  well  as  to 
moral  character  ;  and  these. are  the  only  terms  of 
importance  in  this  discussion. 

I  pass  over  all  that  Mr.  Campbell  has  advanced 
concerning  his  engrossed  proposition,  as  having  no 
material  bearing  on  the  question  at  issue,  and  pro- 
ceed to  notice — 

"  Prop.  7.  A  change  of  vieios,  though  it  neces- 
sai'ily  precedes,  is  in  no  case  equivalent  to,  and 
never  to  he  identified  with,  a  change  of  state." 
p.  194. 

Very  well !  I  concur  in  this  proposition,  I  know 
no  one  who  dissents  from  it.  I  4ismiss  the  two  or 
three  pages  devoted  to  its  illustration  without  far- 
ther consideiation,  and  proceed  to  record — 

"  Prop.  8.  That  the  Gospel  has  in  it  a  command, 
aid  as  such  must  be  obeyed."     p.  196. 

Here  the  author  falls  into  a  grand  fallacv.     "  The 


226*  CAMPBELLISM   IX    ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

Gospel,"  lie  says,  "  has  in  it  a  command."  Where 
did  he  learu  this  ?  It  is  not  so  said  in  the  Scrip- 
tures. Nor  is  any  thing  recorded  from  which  it 
may  be  legitimately,  or  even  plausibly  inferred.  The 
texts  quoted  by  Mr.  Campbell  are  far  from  sustain- 
ing his,  proposition.  The  Gospel  is,  in  some  sense,  a 
law.  It  is  called  by  the  Apostle  James,  "  the  per- 
fect law  of  liberty."  Jas.  1  :  25.  Wherever  the 
Gospel  comes  it  imposes  on  those  who  hear  it  an 
obligation-  to  obey  it.  But  his  conceptions  of  obe- 
dience to  the  Gospel  must  be  extremely  contracted 
who  supposes  that  it  consists  in  a  single  act.  To 
"  obey  the  Gospel"  is  more  than  to  be  immersed. 
This  act,  though  right  in  its  proper  place,  is  not 
obedience  to  the  Gospel.  Kepentance,  faith,  love, 
baptism,  prayer,  praise,  watchfulness,  participation 
in  the  Lord's  Supper,  and  perseverance  in  every 
good  work,  are  all  required  by  the  Gospel,  and  com- 
prehended in  obeying  it.  It  is  most  illogical  to 
infer,  that  because  the  apostles  speak  of  obedience 
to  the  Gospel,  that  it  has  in  it  a  command  that 
must  be  obeyed. 

"  The  obedience  of  the  Gospel  is  called  the  obe- 
dience of  faith,  compared  with  the  obedience  of 
law" — says  Mr.  Campbell.  Very  good  !  I  endorse 
the  sentence.  But,  by  what  authori^.y,  divine,  or 
human,  or  according  to  what  rule  of  logic,  does  he 
call  th(j  "  cbedience  of  the  Gospel,"  an  "  act  of  obe- 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS   PRINCIPLES.  227 

dience,"  and  Ihe  "  obedience  of  faith/'  "  the  act  of 
faith  ?"     Let  us  hear  him — 

"  Whatever  the  act  of  faith  may  be,  it  necessa- 
rily becomes  the  line  of  discrimination  between  the 
two  states  before  described.  On  this  side,  and  on 
that,  mankind  are  in  quite  different  states.  On  the 
one  side,  they  are  pardoned,  justified,  sanctified, 
reconciled,  adopted,  and  saved :  on  the  other  they 
are  in  a  state  of  condemnation.  This  act  is  some- 
times called  immersion,  regeneration^  conversion." 

If  the  "  obedience  of  faith"  is  an  act,  it  is  a  mere 
assumption  that  that  act  is  immersion.  I  will  cut 
this  matter  short.  I  will  prove  by  testimony,  which 
in  this  discussion  is  next  in  authority  to  that  of 
Holy  Writ,  that  the  phrase  "  obedience  of  faith," 
or  "  obey  the  Gospel,"  does  not  mean  "  a  single 
act,"  and,  consequently,  does  not  mean  immersion. 
I  will  quote  Mr.  Campbell  against  Mr.  Campbell ; 
or  the  matured  and  subtle  opponent  of  Mr.  Rice 
against  the  ardent  and  impetuous  author  of  the 
Extra,  resolved  on  establishing  a  favorite  system. 
Hear  the  deponent — 

"  We  neither  believe  nor  teach  that  the  phrase 
*  obedience  of  faith'  means  one  single  act ;  or  that 
obeying  the  Gospel  is  one  solitary  deed.  Certainly 
they  do  not  '  obey  the  Gospel,'  who  do  not  obey 
the  first  precept,  any  more  than  they  who  obey  the 
first,  and  afterwards  apostatize.  The  Gospel  calls 
for  po'petnal   obedience,  or  a  life  of  conformity  to 


228  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   PRINCIPLES 

its  pure  and  elevated  piety  and  humanity."  Debate 
with.  Kice,  p.  534. 

Having,  through  the  puissant  aid  of  Mr.  Camp- 
bell, demolished  the  eighth  proposition,  I  will  now 
proceed  to  examine — 

"  Prop.  9.  That  it  is  not  faith,  hut  an  act  result- 
ing from  faith,  which  changes  our  state,  ive  shaU 
now  attempt  to  prove."     p.  198. 

This  proposition  brings  up  the  real  question  at 
issue.  The  previous  propositions,  with  the  sixteen 
pages  devoted  to  their  illustration,  and  proof,  are 
of  very  little  consequence  in  its  decision.  We  are 
at  last  brought  to  the  simple  question,  W7iat  do 
the  Scriptures  teach  concerning  the  means  by  which 
forgiveness,  or  justification  must  he  obtained  ?  On 
this  question  I  take  issue  with  Mr.  Campbell,  and 
maintain  that  it  is  faith,  and  not  an  act  resulting 
from  faith,  that  changes  our  state,  or  secures  our 
Justification. 

Let  us  endeavor  to  free  from  all  encumbrance  the 
question  under  discussion.  Men  are  by  nature  sin- 
ful, alienated  from  God  by  wicked  works,  and  are, 
consequently,  condemned,  or  obnoxious  to  punish- 
ment. Between  a  state  of  condemnation  and  justi- 
fication— a  state  of  pardon  and  of  guilt,  there  is  no 
medium.  The  transition  from  the  one  state  to  the 
other  must  be  instantaneous.  I  maintain,  in  com- 
mon with  evangelical  Christians  of  every  name, 
that  the  sinner  passes  from  a  state  of  condemnation 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES.  229 

to  a  state  of  justification  at  the  precise  moment 
when  he  truly  believes  in  Christ,  or,  which  is  the 
same  thing,  receives  him  as  a  Deliverer.  John  1  : 
12.  This  justifying  faith  is  not  the  "  bare  belief 
of  the  bare  truth."  I  will  gladly  permit  Mr. 
Campbell  to  define  it  for  me.  "  It  is,"  he  says,  "  a 
belief  of  testimony.  It  is  a  persuasion  that  Grod  is 
true  ;  that  the  Gospel  is  divine  ;  that  God  is  love  ; 
and  that  Christ's  death  is  the  sinner's  life.  It  is 
trust  in  God,  It  is  a  reliance  upon  his  truth,  his 
faithfulness,  his  power.  It  is  not  merely  a  cold  as- 
sent to  truth,  to  testimony  ;  but  a  cordial,  joyful 
consent  to  it,  and  reception  of  it."  Debate  with 
Rice,  p.  618.  If  this  definition  of  faith  does  not 
harmonize  with  the  views  of  faith  elsewhere  recorded 
by  the  same  writer,  that  is  no  concern*  of  mine. 
Now,  this  faith  is  the  principle  of  a  new,  or  spiritual 
life,  involving  reconciliation  with  God,  and  un- 
feigned submission  to  the  authority  of  Christ.  He 
who  thus  believes  is,  in  the  Scripture  sense  of  the 
terras,  converted,  regenerated,  a  new  creature.  He 
was  a  rebel,  but  he  is  now  a  child,  or,  as  Mr. 
Campbell  says,  "  With  it  (faith)  a  man  is  a  son  of 
Abraham,  a  son  of  God  ;  an  heir  apparent  to  eternal 
life — an  everlasting  kingdom."  p.  618.  This  joy- 
ful convert  now  obediently  inquires,  "  Lord,  what 
wilt  thou  have  me  to  do  ?"  God  sees  the  change, 
ppproves  it,  and  freely  and  instantly  forgives  the 
penitent  believoi,  for  Christ's  salce.     But,  according 


230  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PF.INCIPLES. 

to  Mr.  Campbell's  tliecry,  this  believer,  who  has 
given  his  "  cordial,  joyful  consent  to  the"  truth, 
this  "  son  of  God"  is  condemned — exposed  to 
"  everlasting  destruction  from  the  presence  of  the 
Lord,"  until  he  jjerforms  the  "  act  of  faith,"  or 
until  "  the  very  instant  lohen  he  is  put  under  the 
ivate7\" 

If  Christ  and  the  apostles  do  not  teach  that  the 
remission  of  sins,  or  justification,  is  suspended  on 
faith,  and  not  any  act  resulting  from  faith,  I  do  not 
comprehend  in  what  terms  this  instruction  could  be 
conveyed.  But  "  to  the  la\^-,  and  to  the  testimony" 
— What  saith  the  Scripture  ? 

I  answer, 

1.  TJiat  throughout  the  New  Testament,  the  re- 
mission of  sijis,  or  Justification,  is  unequivocally 
and  uncondiftnjially,  connected  with  faith,  or  with 
exercises  ivhich  imply  its  existence. 

In  confirmation  bf  this  position,  I  can  furnish 
only  specimens  of  the  apposite  declarations  with 
which  the  Scriptures  abound. 

Listen  then,  in  the  first  place,  to  the  testimony 
of  the  "  Teacher  sent  from  God."  In  liis  memor- 
able nocturnal  conversation  with  the  Jewish  Eabbi, 
Nicddemus,  he  employed  this  significant  language  . 
"  He  that  belie veth  on  him  (the  Son  of  God)  is  not 
condemned,  but  he  that  believeth  not,  is  condemned 
already,  because  he  hath  not  believed  in  the  name 
of  the  only  Wgotten  Son  of  God."     John  3  :  18. 


%'        CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PElNCIPLES.  23] 

^  he  Saviour  here  poiris  out  two  opposite  conditions 
--a  state  of  condemnation  or  guilt,  and  a  state  of 
freedom  from  condemnation,  or  justification.  He 
testifies,  and  we  are  bound  to  receive  his  testimony, 
that  the  believer  is  in  a  state  of  justification,  and 
the  unbeliever  in  a  state  of  condemnation. 

Let  us  now  turn  to  the  "  ActB  of  the  Apostles," 
and  examine  the  sermons  dictated  by  the  spirit  of 
inspiration,  and  addressed  both  to  the  Jews  and  the 
Gentiles. 

Peter  shall  be  heard  first.  He  healed  a  cripple 
at  the  gate  of  the  Temple,  called  Beautiful.  A 
multitude  was  quickly  drawn  together,  in  Solomon's 
porch,  by  the  report  of  the  miracle.  Thus  Peter 
addressed  the  assembly  :  "  Repent  ye  therefore,  and 
be  converted,  that  your  sins  may  be  blotted  out." 
Acta  3  :  19.  They  were  a  company  of  sinners, 
needing  to  have  their  sins  blotted  out,  or  remitted. 
An  inspired  apostle  stood  before  them,  to  guide 
them  to  the  enjoyment  of  the  ineffable  blessing. 
"Repent,"  said  he,  change  your  minds,  "and  be 
converted,"  reform  your  lives,  (and  these  exercises 
clearly  imply  faith,)  "  that  your  sins  may  be  blotted 
out."  I  cannot  for  a  moment  suppose  that  if  they 
liad  complied  with  Peter's  exhortation  they  would 
have  remained  "  unpardoned." 

"We  will  hear  this  witness  again.  Instructed  by 
a  vision  from  Heaven  the  Apostle  went  from  Joppa 
to  Cesarea,  to  preach  the  Gospel  to  the  Gentiles, 


232  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES.  * 

ArriviDg,  he  found  Cornelius,  the  Centurian,  with 
his  kinsmen  and  near  friends,  convened  to  listen  to 
his  instructions.  He  preached  to  them  Jesus — 
his  resurrection,  and  his  appointment  to  be  "  the 
Judge  of  quick  and  dead."  "  To  him,"  said  Peter, 
"  give  all  the  Prophets  witness,  that  through 
his  name  whosoever  believeth  in  him  shall  receive 
remission  of  sins."  Acts  x :  43.  Name  is  fre- 
quently put  in  the  Scriptures  for  person.  "  The 
name  of  the  God  of  Jacob  defend  thee."  Ps.  xx : 
1.  "  Thou  hast  a  few  names  (persons)  in  Sardis 
which  have  not  defiled  their  garments."  Eev.  iii : 
4.  By  the  "  name  of  Christ"  we  are  to  understand 
the  person  of  Christ,  with  his  character,  sufferings, 
and  works.  That  the  virtue  of  the  name  of  Christ, 
to  procure  the  remission  of  sins,  is  limited  by  bap- 
tism, is  a  mere  conceit.  Peter  said  to  the  cripple, 
"  In  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  of  Nazareth,  rise  up 
and  walk  ;  and  he  leaping  up,  stood  and  walked." 
And  to  the  multitude,  who  were  astonished  at  the 
miracle  of  healing,  he  said,  "  And  his  name,  through 
faith  in  his  name,  hath  made  this  man  strong, 
whom  ye  see."  Acts  iii:  6  and  12.  If  ^^whoso- 
ever believeth  in  him  "  (Christ)  does  not  receive  re- 
mission of  sins,  I  do  not  perceive  how  "  the  Pro- 
phets" can  be  vindicated  from  the  charge  of  bearing 
false  witness.  But  they  did  not  testify  falsely. 
"  Whosoever,"  without  regard  to  rank,  character. 


■  CAMl'BELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES.  233 

clime,  or  outward  condition,  believeth  in  Christ, 
"  SHALL  RECEIVE  remission  of  sins." 

It  is  now  time  that  we  should  listen  to  the  tes- 
timony of  the  "  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles."  Paul  was 
invited  to  address  the  Jews  of  Antioch  in  Pisidia, 
assembled  in  the  Synagogue.  "  Christ  crucified"  was, 
of  course,  his  theme.  "  Be  it  known  unto  you  there- 
fore," said  the  infallible  teacher,  "  men  and  brethren, 
that  through  this  man,"  the  Holy  One  whom  God 
had  raised  again,  "is  preached  unto  you  the  forgive- 
ness of  sins  :  and  by  him  aU  that  believe  are  justi- 
fied from  all  things,  from  which  ye  could  not  be 
justified  by  the  law  of  Moses."  Acts  xiii :  38,  39. 
Never  was  testimony  more  explicit.  It  seems  de- 
signed to  answer  every  inquiry,  and  solve  every 
difficulty  on  the  momentous  subject  of  justification. 
If  the  inquiry  is.  Through  what  channel  do  we  re- 
ceive the  remission  of  sins  ?  the  Apostle  answers, 
"  Through  this  man  (Christ)  is  preached  unto  you 
the  forgiveness  of  sins."  Is  the  question.  How  is 
the  privilege  of  justification  enjoyed  ?  the  reply 
is,  "  They  that  believe  are  justified."  Do  we  ask. 
Are  all  believers  justified,  or  only  such  as  change 
their  state  by  an  overt  act  ?  Paul  answers  empha- 
tically, all.     "  By  him  all  that  believe  are  justified." 

We  will  now  direct  our  attention  to  the  Apos- 
tolic epistles.  Let  us  first  open  the  letter  "  to  all 
that  be  in  Rome,  beloved  of  God,  called  to  be  Saints." 
The  chief  design  of  Paul  ii  writing  this  epistle  waa 


234  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PEINCIPLES. 

to  elucidate  and  establisli  the  evangelic  doctrine 
of  justification  by  faith,  without  the  deeds  of  the 
law.  Here,  if  any  where,  we  may  expect  to  find  an 
explicit  and  satisfactory  exposition  of  this  subject. 
The  writer  could  not,  I  should  think,  guided  as  he 
was  by  the  spirit  of  inspiration,  have  omitted  to 
mention,  in  the  discussion,  baptism,  if  its  perform- 
ance were  indispensable  to  justification.  Such  an 
omission  would  be  unaccountable,  if  not  unfaithful. 
The  Apostle,  having  demonstrated  that  all  men, 
both  Jews  and  Gentiles,  are  guilty  in  the  sight  of 
God — that  by  the  deeds  of  the  law  no  flesh  could 
be  justified,  proceeded  to  unfold,  with  great  clear- 
ness and  precision,  the  ^Gospel  method  of  justifica- 
tion. "  For  if  Abrahatti,"  these  are  Paul's  words, 
"  were  justified  by  works,  he  hath  whereof  to  glory  ; 
but  not  before  God.  For  what  saith  the  Scripture  ? 
Abraham  believed  God,  and  it,"  Abraham's  faith, 
"  was  counted  unto  him  for  righteousness,"  or  justifi- 
cation. "Now  to  him  that  worketh  is  the  reward  not 
reckoned  of  grace,  but  of  debt.  But  to  him  that 
worketh  not,"  with  a  view  to  justification,  "  but  be- 
lieveth  on  him  that  justifieth  the  ungodly,  his  faith," 
not  his  baptism,  "is  counted  for  righteousness." 
Kom.  iv :  2,  5.  I  know  of  no  passage  of  Scrip- 
ture which,  in  so  small  a  compass,  develop  es,  so 
clearly,  God's  plan  of  making  sinners  righteous,  or 
of  justifying  the  ungodly.  Paul  says  to  men,  in 
effect,  you  are  guilty — ^you  deserve  to  perish  in  your 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS    PRINCIPLES.  235 

sins — you  cannot  be  justified  by  your  own  works — 
you  cannot  in  any  measure,  expiate  your  guilt — but 
God  has  graciously  devised  and  revealed  a  scheme 
for  the  salvation  of  men.  If  they  believe  in  Christ 
— cordially  embrace  him  as  their  Saviour — their 
faith  shall  be  counted,  or  imputed  to  them  for  right- 
eousness— they  shall  be  treated  as  if  they  were  right- 
eous— not  because  their  faith  merits  this  privilege 
for  them,  but  because  God  justifies  them  freely  by 
his  grace,  "  through  the  redemption  that  is  in  Christ 
Jesus." 

Throughout  this  elaborate  discussion  of  the  sub- 
ject of  justification,  the  apostle  does  not  pen  a  single 
syllable  on  the  influence  of  the  "  act  of  faith,'*  or 
immersion,  in  securing  this  privilege.  The  best 
proof  of  this  omission  is  furnished  by  the  fact  that 
Mr.  Campbell,  ingenious  as  he  is  in  the  selection  of 
proof  texts,  does  not  venture  to  quote  one  from  this 
epistle  in  support  of  his  theory.  And  the  omission 
is  utterly  at  war  with  the  doctrine  that  faith  and 
baptism  are  equally  necessary  to  obtain  remission  of 
sins  or  justification.  ""^  \       '  • 

1  have  barely  time  to  cite  a  text  from  the  epistle 
to  the  "  churches  of  Galatia,"  in  which  the  truth 
jontendod.  fo^  is  distinctly  and  emphatically  stated. 
'  We  who  are  Jews  by  nature  and  not  sinners  of 
'he  GentUes,  knowing  that  a  man  is  not  justified  by 
the  works  of  the  law,  but  by  the  faith  of  Jesus 
Uhrist,  ejen  we  have  believed  in  Jesus  Christ,  that 


236  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    PlUNClPLES. 

we  might  be  justified  by  the  faith  of  Christ,  and  not 
by  the  works  of  the  law."  ii :  16.  -It  would  be  easy 
to  multiply  quotations  to  prove  that  men  are  brought 
into  a  state  of  justification  by  faith  in  Christ ;  but 
these  specimens  from  the  epistles  must  suffice. 

Perhaps  it  may  be  objected  against  the  position 
under  discussion,  that  the  Apostle  James  affirms, 
"  that  by  works  a  man  is  justified,  and  not  by  faith 
only."  ii :  24.  To  this  objection  I  reply,  the 
Apostle  Paul  no  less  pointedly  declares,  "  that  a 
man  is  justified  by  faith,  without  the  deeds  of  the 
law."  Kom.  iii :  28.  If  the  language  of  these 
writers  is  to  be  understood  without  limitation,  they, 
it  seems  to  me,  flatly  contradict  each  other.  But 
we  must  not  charge  the  spirit  of  inspiration  with 
foUy.  Paul  manifestly  writes  of  the  evangelic  scheme 
of  justification.  Works  of  every  kind  are  excluded 
wholly  from  the  merit  of  justification.  Men  are 
justified  by  faith,  through  the  redemption  which  is 
in  Christ,  by  free  grace,  without  the  meritorious  in- 
fluence of  works.  The  design  of  James  is,  to  show 
that  men  are  justified  not  by  a  dead,  but  living  and 
fruitful  faith.  "  What  does  it  profit,  my  brethren, 
though  a  man  say  he  hath  faith,  and  have  not  works  ? 
Can  fliith  (such  a  faith)  save  him  ?"  Certainly  not 
"  Faith,  if  it  hath  not  works,  is  dead,  (incapable  of 
justifying,)  being  alone."  It  is  no  better  than  tht 
faith  of  devils.  "  Was  not  Abraham,  our  father, 
justified  by  works   when  he  had  offered  Isaac,  hi? 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    TRINCIPLES.  237 

•!on,  upon  the  altar  ?"  But  bow  did  works  justify 
Abraham  ?  Why,  "  faith  wrought  with  his  works, 
and  by  works  was  faith  made  perfect" — exhibited 
as  a  living,  fruitful  faith.  "  And  the  Scripture  was 
fulfilled,  (verified)  which  saith,  Abraham  believed 
God,  and  (mark  this,)  it  tvas  imputed  unto  him  for 
rigJiteousness." 

Whether  this  be  the  correct  solution  of  the  diffi- 
culty, is  not  material  in  this  discussion.  The  ob- 
jection cannot  avail  the  advocates  of  baptismal  re- 
mission. "  A  man,"  says  James,  "is  justified  by 
works" — not  by  baptism,  but  by  works — an  obedient 
life.  In  whatever  sense  the  language  be  understood, 
it  effectually  explodes  the  notion  that  the  remission 
of  sins,  or  justification,  is  obtained  "  in  and  through 
immersion." 

II.  That  in  many  places  in  the  New  Testament 
spiritual  blessings,  which  imply  the  remission  of 
sins  J  are  positively  promised  to  faith. 

In  support  of  this  position,  I  observe, 

1.  That  salvation  is  promised  to  faith.  The  re- 
mission of  sins  is  comprehended  in  salvation.  Christ 
saves  his  people  from  their  sins — from  their  guilt  as 
well  as  their  practice.  A  sinner  saved  and  unpar- 
doned is  a  manifest  impossibility.  If  then  salvation 
is  enjoyed  by  faith,  so  is  pardon.  Hear  what  Paul 
Bays :  "  I  am  not  ashamed  of  the  Gospel  of  Christ : 
for  it  is  the  power  of  God  unto  salvation,  to  every 
one  that  belie veth,  to  *he  Jew  first,  and  also  to  the 


238  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

Greek."  Kom.  1 :  16.  The  Gospel  is  the  power- 
ful and  efficient  means  which  God  employs  for  sav- 
ing men.  But  to  w^hom  does  its  saving  efficacy 
reach  ?  "  To  every  one  that  believeth."  Does  its 
saving  power  extend  to  all  nations  ?  Yes,  "  to  tho 
Jew  first,  and  also  to  tho  Greek." 

Paul  and  Silas  were  committed  to  prison  in  the 
city  of  Philippi,  for  preaching  the  Gospel  of  Christ. 
God  graciously  and  miraculously  interposed  for  their 
rescue.  A  great  earthquake  shook  the  foundation)^ 
of  the  prison,  and  all  the  doors  were  opened,  and 
every  one's  hands  were  loosed.  The  jailor,  seized 
with  a  conviction  of  his  guilt  and  danger,  fell  down 
before  Paul  and  Silas,  and  said,  "  Sirs,  what  must 
I  do  to  be  saved  ?"  Never  was  a  more  important 
question  propounded.  Never  w^as  a  more  direct, 
explicit,  and  satisfactory  answer  given.  •''  Believe 
on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  thou  shalt  be  saved." 
And  is  it  possible  that  these  inspired  men  directed 
the  anxious  prison  keeper  to  do  that  which,  Kemg 
performed,  would  have  left  him  still  in  an  unpar- 
doned, unsaved  state  ?  Did  they  promise  salvation 
to  an  exercise  with  which  it  is  not  essentially  con- 
nected ?     Surely  not. 

2,  Adoption  into  the  family  of  God  is  the  privi- 
lege of  helievers.  That  the  remission  of  sins  is  in- 
separably united  with  this  honor,  I  need  hardly 
attempt  to  prove. .  To  suppose  that  the  sons  of  God 
are  still  r.n pardoned  is  a  gross  absurdity.     That  be- 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES.  239 

lievers  enjoy  this  high  honor  the  evangelist  John 
testifies.  "  He  (the  Word)  came  unto  his  own,  and 
his  own  received  him  not.  But  as  many  as  received 
him,  to  them  gave  he  power  (right  or  privilege)  to 
become  the  sons  of  God,  even  to  them  that  believe 
on  his  name  :  which  were  born,  not  of  blood,  nor  of 
the  will  of  the  flesh,  nor  of  the  will  of  man,  but  of 
God."  1  :  11,  13.  Or,  as  the  passage  is  rendered 
by  Dr.  Campbell,  "  But  to  as  many  as  received  him, 
believing  in  his  name,  he  granted  the  privilege  of 
heing  children  of  God,  who  derive  their  birth  not 
from  blood,"  &c.  If  God  has  graciously  conferred 
on  believers  the  privilege  of  being  sons  of  God,  who 
can  disannul  it  ? 

3.  Eternal  life  is  distinctly  promised  to  faith. 
To  bestow  eternal  life  on  men  "  dead  in  trespasses 
and  sins,"  is  the  prime  end  of  Messiah's  mission  on 
earth.  "  I  am  come,"  said  he,  "  that  they  might 
have  life,  and  that  they  might  have  it  more  abun- 
dantly." Every  spiritual  blessing  is  conferred  in 
subservience  to  this  benevolent  design.  Now  listen 
to  the  teaching  of  Him  who  cannot  lie.  "As  Moses 
lifted  up  the  serpent  in  the  wilderness,  even  so  must 
the  Son  of  man  be  lifted  up  ;  that  whosoever  be- 
lie veth  on  him  should  not  perish,  but  have  eternal 
life."  Jno.  3:  14,  15.  Now  just  as  certainly  as  the 
Israelites,  bitten  by  the  fiery  serpents,  were  healed 
by  looking  at  the  brazen  serpent,  on  the  pole,  will 
"  whosoever  believeth"  in  Christ,  gain  eternal  life. 


240  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

But  you  shall  have  testimony  more  explicit  than 
this,  if  more  explicit  testimony  can  be.  "  Verily, 
verily,  I  say  unto  you,"  these  are  the  words  of  Christ 
to  the  captious  Jews,  "  he  that  believe th  on  me 
hath  everlasting  life" — not  he  may  have,  nor  he 
shall  have — ^but  he  hath  everlasting  life — he  has 
within  him  the  embryo  of  immortal  life — '*  being 
born  again,  not  of  corruptible  seed,  but  of  incorrup- 
tible, by  the  word  of  God  which  liveth  and  abideth 
forever."     Jno.  6  :  47—1  Pet.  1 :  23.  * 

III.  Tliat  privileges  which  are  inseparable  from 
the  remission  of  sins  are  frequently  promised j  in 
the  New  Testament,  to  exercises  or  graces  that  imply 
the  existence  of  faith. 

I  will  proceed  at  once  to  confirm  this  proposition. 

1.  The  kingdom  of  Heaven,  (which  doubtless  in- 
cludes all  the  blessings  of  the  kingdom — the  remis- 
sion of  sins,  among  the  rest,)  is  promised  to  humility. 
"  Blessed,"  said  Jesus,  in  his  inimitable  sermon  on 
the  mount,  "  are  the  poor  in  spirit  :  for  theirs  is" 
— not  may  be  or  shall  be,  but  is  already,  "  the  king- 
dom of  Heaven."     Mat,  5  :  3 — see  also  to  v.  11. 

2.  Salvation  is  promised  to  prayer.  "  For  who- 
soever shall  call  on  the  name  of  the  Lord  shall  be 
saved."  Rom.  10  :  13.  Salvation  includes,  as  has 
been  already  stated,  the  remission  of  sins.  It  is 
promised  to  him  who  "  shall  call  on  the  name  of  the 
Lord."  This  promise  is  not  made  to  a  heartless, 
hypocritical  calling  on  the  Lord.     "  This  people," 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES.  24i 

said  the  Son  of  God,  "draweth  nigh  to  me  with  their 
mouth,  and  honoreth  me  with  their  lips  ;  but  their 
neart  is  far  from  me."  But  the  promise  is  made 
to  sincere,  believing  prayer — to  such  as  "  call  on  the 
Lord  out  of  a  pure  heart" — to  such  as  pray,  "  lifting 
up  holy  hands,  without  wrath  and  doubting."  1 
Tim.  2  :  8.  "  For  without  faith  it  is  impossible  to 
please  God."  Heb.  11  :  6.  i'  How  then  shall  they 
call  on  him  in  whom  they  have  not  believed  ?" 

3.  Adoption,  which  supposes  the  remission  of 
sins,  is  declared  to  be  the  privilege  of  such  persons 
as  follow  the  guidance  of  the  Spirit.  "  For  as  many 
as  are  led  by  the  Spirit  of  God,"  (and  if  those  who 
repent  and  believe  the  Gospel  are  not  led  by  the 
Spirit  of  Gcd,  by  what  spirit  are  they  led  ?)  "  they 
are  the  sons  of  God."  Rom.  8  :  14.  Perhaps  it  may 
be  replied  that  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  will  lead  men 
to  an  observance  of. the  Christian  ordinances.  I 
grant  it.  And  he  will  lead  those  persons  under  his 
influence  "  all  the  length  of  the  celestial  road." 
But  when  do  they  become  the  sons  of  God  ?  Not 
till  they  reach  the  end  of  their  journey,  or  at  the 
middle  of  it^-or  in  the  commencement  of  it  ?  At 
the  beginning  surely.  Otherwise  it  would  not  be 
true  that  "  as  many  as  are  led  by  the  Spirit  of 
God," — but  such  only  as  have  traveled  the  pre- 
scribed distance — "  are  the  sons  of  God." 

IV.  That  the  remission  of  sins  ivas,  in  variou* 


242  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES. 

cases,  possessed  and  enjoyed  by  faith,  without,  or 
before  baiDtism.     This  we  can  clearly  show. 

Jesus  was  crucified  between  two  malefactors. 
One  of  them  railed  on  him.  The  other,  touched  with 
compunction  at  the  remembrance  of  his  crimes,  said 
unto  Jesus,  (and  this  prayer  implied  faith,)  "Lord, 
remember  me  when  thou  comest  into  thy  kingdom." 
Jesus  replied  to  him,  long  after  he  had  said  to 
Nicodemus,  "  Except  a  man  be  born  of  water  and 
of  the  Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of 
God,"  "  To-day  shalt  thou  be  with  me  in  Paradise;" 
and  he  certainly  did  not  go  to  Paradise  in  his  sins, 
Luke  23  :  39,  43.  Perhaps  it  may  be  said  that  this 
was  an  extraordinary  case.  Then,  let  us  examine 
another  instance. 

The  publican  went  up  to  the  temple  to  pray,  and 
"  standing  afar  off,  would  not  lift  up  so  much  as  his 
eyes  unto  heaven,  but  smote  upon  his  breast,  (con- 
scious of  his  guilt,)  saying,  (and  this  prayer  evi- 
dently was  the  "  prayer  of  faith,")  God  be  merciful 
to  me  a  sinner."  And  did  God  hear  the  prayer  of 
this  penitent  believer  and  remit  his  sins  ?  Yes  ! 
"  This  man  went  down  to  his  house  (not  baptized, 
hwi)  justified  rather  than  the  other."  Luke  18  :  10, 
14.  So  true  it  is,  that  "  a  broken  and  contrite 
heart"  God  will  not  despise.  Possibly  it  may  be 
objected  (though  the  objection  is,  in  my  view,  of  no 
validity,)  that  these  cases  occurred  before  the  giving 
of  the  apostolic  commission.     Well,  then,  to  silence 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES,  243 

the   last  objection,  let  us   select  another  and   an 
apposite  case. 

I  have  already  adverted  to  the  conversion  of  Cor- 
nelius and  his  friends  ;  hut  I  must  again  recur  to 
the  interesting  subject.  While  Peter  was  uttering 
these  memorable  words,  "  To  him  (Jesus)  give  all 
the  prophets  witness,  that  through  his  name  who- 
soever believeth  in  him  shall  receive  remission  of 
sins,"  "  the  Holy  Ghost  fell  on  all  them  which  heard 
the  words  ;"  aad  they  began  to  "  speak  with  tongues 
and  to  magnify  God."  It  is  not  affirmed  by 
the  historian  that  these  Gentile  converts  were  for- 
given before  their  baptism ;  but  consider  carefully 
the  facts  of  the  case.  Peter  affirmed  that  whosoever 
believeth  in  Christ  (the  Gentile  as  well  as  the  Jew,) 
shall  receive  remission  of  sins.  In  attestation  of  this 
truth  the  Holy  Ghost  was  poured  on  all  the  hear- 
ers ;  that  is,  they  were  copiously  endowed  with  the 
miraculous  gifts  of  the  Spirit.  Now,  I  ask,  can  any 
man  in  his  sober  senses,  and  whose  mind  is  not 
warped  by  theory,  believe  that  these  Gentile  con- 
verts were  "  baptized  with  the  Holy  Ghost,"  Acts 
11  :  16,  while  they  were  yet  in  their  sins,  with  the 
Avrath  of  God  abiding  on  them  ?  The  Jewish  con- 
verts censured  Peter  because  he  went  in  to  men 
uncircumcised,  and  did  eat  with  them.  The  apostle 
tiiumphantly  vindicated  his  conduct,  "Foras- 
much," said  he,  "  as  God  gave  unto  them  the  like 
gift  as  he  did  unto  iis  who  believed  on  the  Lord 


244  CAMPBELLISM    IN   ITS   PKINCIPLES. 

Jesus  Christ,  what  was  I,  that  I  could  withstand 
God  ?"  Acts  11 :  17.  When  he  saw  that  God  had 
received  the  Gentiles  to  his  favor,  his  Jewish  preju- 
dices were  slain,  and  he  inquired,  "  Can  any  man 
forbid  water,  that  these  should  not  he  baptized," 
not  in  order  to  receive,  either  the  remission  of  their 
sins,  or  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  but  who  "  have 
received  the  Holy  Ghost,"  and  by  fair  inference  the 
forgiveness  of  their  sins  ?  Acts  10  :  43,  48.  I 
know  not  what  impression  this  case  may  make  on 
other  minds  ;  but  to  my  own  mind  it. furnishes  a 
conclusive  refutation  of  the  dogma,  that  we  have 
the  remission  of  "  sins  in  and  through  immersion." 

"  Many  blessings,"  says  the  Reformer,  "  are 
metonymically  ascribed  to  faith,  in  the  sacred  writ- 
ings." Metonymy  is  "  a  trope  in  which  one  word 
is  put  for  another."  But  for  what  word  is  faith  put  ? 
We  know  not,  and  he  has  not  informed  us.  He 
continues — "  We  are  said  to  be  justified,  sanctified, 
and  purified  by  faith — to  walk  by  fiiith,  and  to  live 
by  faith,  &c.,  &c.  But  these  sayings,  as  qualified 
by  the  apostles,  mean  no  more  than  by  believing 
the  truth  of  God,  we  have  access  into  all  these  bless- 
ings." Chn'ty  Restored,  p.  198.  Is  this  all.? 
When  Christ  asserts  that,  "He  that  believeth  on 
the  Son  hath  everlasting  life,"  does  he  mean,  not 
that  he  has  the  germ,  or  assurance  of  life,  but  merely 
access  to  it  ?  When  he  affirms,  that  the  believer 
"  is  not  condemned,"  does  he  mea  i  simply  to  teach, 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS   rRINCIPLES,  245 

that  he  is  condemned,  but  has  access  to  a  state  of 
justification  ?  When  Paul  declares  that  "  faith  is 
counted  for  righteousness,"  does  he  mean  that  faith 
is  not  counted  for  righteousness,  hut  the  believer  is 
in  a  condition,  in  which,  by  performing  an  "  overt 
act,"  he  may  have  access  to  this  blessing  ?  Mr. 
Campbell  asserts,  but  does  not  prove  his  position. 

I  must  notice  what  he  considers  a  conclusive  re- 
futation of  all  the  arguments  of  his  opponents  in 
support  of  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith,  pre- 
viously to  baptism.  "When  they  find,"  he  says, 
"  where  remission  of  sins  is  mentioned  without  im- 
mersion, it  is  weak,  it  is  unfair,  in  the  extreme,  to 
argue  from  that,  that  forgiveness  can  be  enjoyed 
without  immersion.  If  their  logic  he  worth  any 
thing,  it  luill  prove,  that  a  man  may  he  forgiven 
without  grace,  the  hlood  of  Jesus,  and  loithout  faith ; 
for  ive  can  find  passages,  many  passages,  where 
remission,  or  justif cation,  sanctifcation,  or  some 
similar  term  occurs,  and  no  mention  of  either  grace, 
faith,  or  the  hlood  of  Jesus."  Chn'ty  Restored, 
p.  217. 

The  italicised  sentence  above,  on  account  of  its 
supposed  importance,  is  printed  by  its  author  Id 
bold  capitals.  A  few  remarks  will  suffice  to  sho\r 
the  feebleness  of  this  objection.  Faith  is  indis- 
soluhly  united  loith  grace  and  the  hlood  of  Christ 
The  blood  of  Christ  is  the  object  of  saving  faith 
"  Whom  (Christ)  God  halh  set  forth  to  be  a  propi 


246  CAMPBELLISil   IN    ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

tiation  through  faith  in  his  Mood,  to  declare  his 
righteousness  for  tt.e  remission  of  sins/'  &c,  Rom. 
3  :  25.  Faith  is  the  product  of  grace,  and  through 
grace  faifh  is  imputed  for  righteousness.  Rom.  4  : 
3-5.  Faith  implies — ^is  inseparable  from — repent- 
ance, conversion,  holiness.  Now,  suppose  remis- 
sion, or  justification  is,  in  many  passages,  promised, 
where  no  mention  is  made  of  "either  grace,  faith, 
or  the  blood  of  Jesus  ;"  the  Messing  is  promised  to 
some  holy  exercise  or  quality  which  implies  the  ex- 
istence of  faith,  and  is  inseparaMy  united  to  grace 
and  the  Mood  of  Christ.  But,  mark  this  !  haptism 
is  not  essentially  connected  with  faith,  nor  loith  any 
of  the  exercises  lohich  suppose  the  existence  of  faith, 
A  man  must  be  a  believer,  in  the  full.  Scriptural 
sense  of  the  term,  before  he  is  a  fit  subject  of  bap- 
tism. A  period  longer  or  shorter,  must  elapse  be- 
tween the  moment  of  believing  and  the  moment  of 
immersion.  Nay,  there  is  no  certainty,  there  can 
be  none,  that  immersion  will  ever  follow  the  act  of 
believing.  The  sum  of  the  matter  is  this,  when  re- 
mission or  justification  is  promised  to  faith,  then  re- 
pentance, conversion,  the  •  new  birth,  holiness,  the 
spirit  of  obedience,  the  grace  of  Grod,  and  the  blood 
of  Christ,  are  implied — are  all  indissolubly  united. 
But  neither  haptism,  nor  a  participation  in  the 
Lord's  supper,  is  supposed  in  the  promise,  nor  es- 
sentially connected  icith  the  Messing. 

The   wisdom-  and  grace  of   God   are    eminently 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES.  247      ^ 

manifested  in  making  faith,  and  not  immersion,  the 
line  of  discrimination  between  the  states  of  con- 
demnation and  justification.  It  is  a  line  invisible 
to  us,  but  not  to  God.  It  marks  the  precise  point 
at  ■which  the  rebel  becomes  a  child — It  is  the  com- 
mencement of  spiritual  life — and  is  the  source  of 
all  true  obedience.  "  Indeed,  true  faith  necessarily 
works  ;  therefore,  a  working  faith  is  the  only  true, 
real,  and  proper  faith  in  Divine  or  human  esteem." 
Campbell  on  Baptism,  p.  282.  It  is  inseparable 
from  conversion,  or  regeneration,  and  an  exercise 
acceptable  to  God.  Let  us  hear  the  opinion  of  the 
Keformer  on  this  point.  "  Now  as  faith  in  God  is 
the  first  principle — the  soul-renewing  principle  of 
religion  ;  as  it  is  the  regenerating,  justifying,  sanc- 
tifying principle;  without  it,  it  is  impossible  to 
please  God.  With  it,"  I  must  repeat  this  sentence, 
"a  man  is  a  son  of  Abraham,  a  son  of  God ;  an 
heir  apparent  to  eternal  life."  But  on  this  subject 
I  can  furnish  higher  authority  than  that  of  Mr. 
Campbell.  -The  Apostle  John  says,  ^^  Whosoever 
helieveth  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  is  born  of  God." 
1  John  5:1.  Now,  in  view  of  the  excellent  nature, 
and  momentous  relations  of  faith,  does  it  not  seem 
most  worthy  of  God,  and  most  suitable  to  man, 
that  it  should  be  the  exercise  to  which  the  remis- 
sion of  sins,  and  eternal  life  are  promised  ?  Can 
"  a  son  of  Abraham,  a  son  of  God,"  be  still  in  a 
state  if  condemnation  ?     Even  Mr.  Campbell,  who 


248  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES. 

once  niaintcained  so  strenuously,  that  a  man  cannot 
be  born  of  God,  until  lie  is  born  of  w,ater,  is  con- 
strained to  admit,  "  that  to  he  horn  of  God,  and 
horn  in  sin,  is  inconceivahle.  Remission  of  sins," 
he  saj^s,  "is  as  certainly  granted  to  the-  horn  of 
God,  as  life  eternal,  and  deliverance  from  corrup- 
tion, will  be  granted  to  the  children  of  the  resurrec- 
tion, when  born  from  the  grave."  Christianity  Ee- 
stored,  p.  208.  If  then  the  believer  is  "  a  son  of 
God,"  as  Mr.  Campbell  in  one  place  testifies,  and 
as  the  Scriptures  distinctly  teach,  it  is  a  monstrous 
supposition,  at  war  alike  with  our  conceptions  of 
the  evangelical  scheme  of  justification,  and  the  char- 
acter of  the  Supreme  Ruler,  that  he  is  in  his  sins, 
until  he  can  perform  "  an  overt  act,"  which  he  may 
never  be  able  to  do. 

It  must,  however,  be  conceded  that  there  is  a 
connexion  hetween  haptism  and  the  remission  of 
sins.  In  some  sense  haptism  ivashes  away  sins. 
I  purpose  to  inquire  what  this  connexion  is  ? 

Baptism  must  either  be  the  means,  or  the  condi- 
tion of  ohtaining  the  remission  of  sins  ;  or  it  is  the 
means  of  declaring,  or  confessing,  the  remission  of 
sins,  previously  obtained  by  faith.  Either  it  sus- 
tains a  relation  to  forgiveness  like  that  which 
repentance  and  faith  sustain  ;  or  its  relation  to  for- 
giveness is  that  of  a  sign  to  the  thing  signified. 

There  is  no  medium  between  these  schemes.  The 
Rev.  Mr.  Meredith,  the  late  estimable  editor  of  the 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   PRINCIPLES.  249 

Biblical  Recorder,  labored  harrf,  ingeniously,  but 
unsuccessfully,  to  establish  an  intermediate  scheme. 
But  in  spite  of  the  most  subtle  distinctions,  we  arc 
forced  to  the  conclusion,  either  that  baptism  is  an 
act  upon  the  proper  performance  of  which  God  has 
promised  that  forgiveness  shall  ensue,  and  without 
such  performance  there  is  no  promise  of  forgiveness.; 
or  that  baptism  is  a  sign  or  declaration  of  forgive- 
ness actually  received  and  enjoyed  by  faith  in  Christ, 

Mr.  Campbell  without  dispute  embraces  the 
former  scheme.  Baptism,  accoixling  to  the  "  ancient 
Gospel,"  is  not  the  figure  or  formal  acknowledgment 
of  the  remission  of  sins,  but  the  indispensable,  and, 
it  would  seem,  the  only  condition  of  obtaining  it. 
"  I  assert,"  he  says,  and  truly,  it  is  mere  assertion, 
"  that  there  is  but  one  action  ordained  or  command- 
ed in  the  New  Testament,  to  wliich  God  has 
promised,  or  testified,  that  he  Avill  forgive  our  sins. 
This  action  is  Christian  immersion."  Chn.  Bap., 
p.  520. 

Is  this  scheme  of  forgiveness  Scriptural  ?  Is 
baptism,  like  repentance  and  faith,  an  indispensable 
condition  of  the  remission  of  sins  ? 

Let  the  reader  notice — First.  That  this  scheme 
of  remission  flatly  contradicts  plain  and  numeroub 
Scripture  testimonies.  These  testimonies,  or  speci- 
mens of  them,  I  have  already  alduced.  Now,  it  is 
a  sound  and  admitted  principle  of  Biblical  interpre- 
tation, tb\t   tho  Scriptures  should  be  construed  in 


250  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES 

harmony  with  themselves.  The  obscure  must  be 
elucidated  by  the  clear,  and  the  figurative  by  the 
literal.  It  is  impossible '  for  words  to  express  more 
clearly,  pointedly,  ahd  emphatically,  than  do  the 
Scriptures,  that  God  has  suspended  the  forgiveness 
of  sins  on  the  exercise  of  faith.  Take  for  an  illus- 
tration the  words  of  Christ  to  the  Jewish  Kabbi — 
"  He  that  believeth  on  him  (the  Son)  is  not  con- 
demned," and  is  consequently,  pardoned,  or  justified. 
Now,  "  baptism  for  the  remission  of  sins,"  a  phrase 
susceptible  of  difi'erent  interpretations,  must  be  con- 
strued in  harmony  with  this  unambiguous  language 
of  the  great  Teacher.  And  the  remark  is  true  of 
all  the  texts  under  consideration. 

Secondly.  That  the  Scriptures  manifestly  make 
a  distinction  between  the  relation  Xvhich  faith,  and 
that  which  baptism  bears  to  the  remission  of  sins. 
We  read  in  the  Scriptures,  and  many  such  passages 
may  be  found,  ''  He  that  believeth  not  shall  be 
damned.*'  "  Except  ye  repent,  ye  shall  all  likewise 
perish."  "If  any  man  love  not  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  let  him  be  anathema  maran-atha,"  Now, 
we  do  not  read,  nor  is  it  intimated,  nor  is  any  thing 
recorded,  from  which  it  may  be  fairly  inferred,  that 
if  a  man  is  not  immersed,  he  is  condemned,  doomed 
to  perish — and  to  be  anathematized  at  the  coming 
of  our  Lord.  But  if  Christ  has  made,  as  Mr.  Camp- 
bell contends,  repentance,  faith,  and  immersion 
"  equally  ne«  is&ary  to  forgiveness,"  how  can  it  bo 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES.  251 

accounted  for,  that  neither  Christ  nor  his  apostles 
ever  uttered  a  malediction  against  the  unbaptized  ? 
How  can  their  silence  on  this  point  be  reconciled 
with  their  love  and  fidelity  to  the  souls  of  men,  and 
at  the  same  time  with  the  doctrine  that  the  peni- 
tent believer,  glowing  with  love  to  Jesus,  is  under 
the  curse,  until  he  is  immersed  ? 

Thirdl'ij.  There  are  consequences  involved  in  the 
theory  of  baptismal  remission  which  may  well  make 
us  hesitate  to  adopt  it.  God  has  a  perfect  right  to 
prescribe  the  conditions  of  forgiveness  ;  and  we  are 
bound  to  receive,  with  readiness  and  gratitude,  such 
as  he  may  prescribe.  But  when  any  interpretation 
of  the  divinely  prescribed  terms  of  forgiveness  leads 
to  conclusions,  absurd  in  themselves,  at  variance 
with  the  genius  of  the  Gospel,  and  seemingly  deroga- 
tory to  God,  we  certainly  should  hesitate  long,  and 
examine  carefully,  before  we  adopt  it.  The  conclu- 
sions, logically  deducible  from  the  doctrine  of  bap- 
tismal remission,  are  such  as  to  make  me  believe 
that  it  is  based  on  a  misiuterpret?,{ion  of  the  Scrip- 
tures. 

Let  us  now  seriously  notice*  pome  of  the  legitimate 
consequences  cf  the  dogma  ';rhich  I  am  combating. 

If  the  remission  of  sin^  is  enjoyed  only  through 
immersion  ;  or,  in  otl)or  words,  if  "  baptism  is  the 
onJy  medium  divinely  appointed,  through  which  the 
eftiracy  of  the  blood  of  Christ  is  communicated  to 
th/  conscience,"  then,  I  remark. 


252  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES. 

1.  That  the  salvation  of  men,  even  of  penitoi  t 
believers,  is  in  the  hands  of  the  authorized  baptizers. 
Popish  priests  have  claimed  the  power  of  remitting 
sins  ;  but  Protestants  have  ever  considered  the  claim 
an  arrogant  assumption.  I  freely  concede  that  those 
who  maintain  the  sentiment  which  I  am  opposing 
may  not  have  examined  its  bearing  and  consequences. 
I  speak  not  of  them,  but  of  their  doctrine.  It  is, 
however,  as  clear  as  that  two  and  two  make  four, 
that  the  remission  of  the  believer's  sins,  according 
to  this  theory,  depends,  not  on  the  will  of  God,  but 
on  the  will  of  man.  He  cannot  baptize  himself ; 
and  if  the  qualified  administrator  does  not  choose, 
under  no  matter  what  plea,  to  baptize,  (or  regener- 
ate) him,  he  must  either  be  pardoned  without  im- 
mersion, be  saved  without  pardon,  or  be  lost.  No 
sophistry  can  evade  this  consequence. 

2.  That  salvation  may  be  entirely  beyond  the 
reach  of  the  most  humble,  obedient  and  faiXhful  ser- 
vants of  Christ.  Let  me  suppose  a  case.  Fidelis, 
after  a  careful  examination  of  the  subject,  became  a 
convert  to  Christianity.  Deeply  conscious  of  his 
guilt  and  un worthiness,  he  cordially  embraced  Christ, 
as  his  prophet,  priest,  and  king  ;  consecrating  to 
him,  in  the  unfeigned  purpose  of  his  heart,  his  body, 
soul,  and  spirit ;  with  all  his  time,  and  all  his  pos- 
sessions. Enraptured  with  the  Saviour's  channs, 
he  rejoiced  in  hJ.s  word  and  worship  from  day  to  day. 
Having  settled  his  views  on  the  subject  of  baj^tism, 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES.  253 

he  designed,  at  the  earliest  opportunity,  to  take  on 
him  the  badge  of  discipleship  in  baptism.  But,  by 
order  of  Tyrannus,  an  inveterate  enemy  to  Christ, 
he  was  arrested  and  cast  into  prison,  f6r  his  ardent 
zeal,  and  dauntless  testimony  in  the  Redeemer's 
cause.  To  him  baptism  is  now  impossible.  And 
poor  Fidelis  cannot  enjoy  the  remission  of  his  sins. 
Perhaps,  it  may  be  replied,  "  That  God  is  merciful 
— that  he  does  not  require  impossibilities — and  that 
he  may  accept  the  will  for  the  deed,"  These  are 
tlie  very  considerations  which  make  me  suspect  that 
God  has  not  suspended  the  remission  of  sins  on  that 
which  to  a  good  man  may  be  impracticable — on 
something  extraneous  to  the  new  creature.  Besides 
the  persecuted  Fidelis  needs  something  more  solid 
than  a  "  perhaps,"  a  "  may  be,"  or  a  conjecture,  to 
support  him  in  his  dark  and  solitary  confinement  ; 
God  has  not  withheld  the  stable  ground  of  comfort, 
as  I  have  clearly  evinced. 

3.  That  the  enlightened  and  tender  conscience 
can  never  be  fully  satisfied.  Questions  as  to  the 
validity,  and  sin-cleansing  efficacy  of  baptism  must 
arise.  I  can  easily  know  when  I  have  passed  from 
Virginia  into  Ohio,  because  they  are  separated  by 
water.  I  may  certainly  know  that  I  have  been  im- 
mersed ;  but  whether  I  have  received  valid,  re- 
generating baptism,  is  another  matter.  Does  its 
efficacy  depend  on  the  qualifications  of  the  adminis- 
trator 1  on  his  piety  .^  on  his  baptism  ?  on  his  church 


254  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PllINClPLES. 

connexion  ?  on  his  ordination  ?  on  his  intention  ? 
Is  apostolical  succession,  either  in  the  line  of  bap- 
tism or  of  ordination,  essential  to  its  validity  ?  Is 
its  sin  pardoning  virtue  connected  with  the  views 
entertained  of  it  by  the  subject  ?  If  "  baptism  is 
the  only  medium  divinely  appointed,  through  which 
the  efficacy  of  the  blood  of  Christ  is  communicated 
to  the  conscience,'"'  then,  it  would  seem  to  me,  that 
the  believer,  tremblingly  alive  to  his  own  salvation, 
must  be  filled  with  intense  and  ceaseless  dread,  lest 
the  channel,  through  some  defect,  or  leak,  should 
permit  the  grace  of  pardon  to  escape  before  it 
reaches  his  sin- smitten  conscience.  Indeed,  some 
have  been  goaded  by  this  very  apprehension  to  a 
repetition  of  the  ordinance. 

4.  That  repentance,  the  most  sincere  and  lasting 
— ^faith,  the  most  vigorous — love,  the  most  self- 
sacrificing — the  sanctifying  influence  of  the  Holy 
Spirit — the  atoning  blood  of  Christ — ^his  intercession 
before  the  throne — and  the  abounding  grace  of  the 
Father,  are  all,  without  baptism,  unavailing  for  sal- 
vation. I  do  not  affirm  that  all  who  adopt  the 
sentiment  which  I  am  combating,  push  it  to  this 
£xtent,  but  I  fearlessly  aver  that  this  is  its  plain, 
legitimate,  and  inevitable  consequence.  This  gives 
to  baptism  an  unscriptural  prominence  in  the  Chris- 
tian system.  It  must  tend,  as  the  kindred  dogma 
of  transubstantiation  has  tended  among  Papists,  to 
engender  superstition.     At  first  the  water  of  bap- 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES.  255 

tism  is  deemed  of  equal  moment  in  the  scheme  of 
salvation  with  the  cleansing  blood  of  the  Kedeemer  ; 
and  by  degrees  the  sign  will  come  to  be  substituted 
for  the  thing  signified — the  ceremonial  to  be  pre- 
ferred to  the  vital.  What  has  occurred  may  occur 
again.  Strange  as  it  may  appear,  the  error  \vhich 
I  have  been  exposing,  is  the  root  of  infant  baptism. 
We  learn  from  Salmasius,  a  learned  historian  and 
critic,  quoted  by  Booth  in  his  Paedobaptism  Ex- 
amined, that  among  the  ancients,  "  an  opinion  pre- 
vailed that  no  one  could  be  saved  without  being 
baptized  ;  and  for  that  reason,  the  custom  arose  of 
baptizing  infants."  This  error  had  its  origin, 
according  to  the  testimony  of  Suiceras,  a  learned 
divine  and  professor  of  Greek  and  Hebrew  at  Zurich, 
(quoted  by  the  same  indefatigable  inquirer  after 
truth,)  in  a  "  wrong  understanding  of  our  Lord's 
words,  except  a  man  be  born  of  tvatcr  and  of  the 
Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into  the  Jcingdom  of  heaven." 

"  It  (infant  baptism)  arose  from  false  views  of  ori- 
ginal sin,  and  of  the  magical  power  of  consecrated 
water."     Prof  Hahn's  Theology,  p.  5oQ, 

"  The  immediate  occasion  of  infant  baptism,  it 
cannot  he  denied,  was  extravagant  ideas  of  its  neces- 
sity  to  salvation."  Dressler's  Doctrine  of  the  Sacra- 
ment of  Baptism,  p.  152.  Chris.  Keview,  June, 
1838,  p.  198,199. 

I  can  easily  conceive  the  influence  of  this  error  on 
ignoran  •  and  superstitious  people.     If  baptism  be 


256  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITb   PRINCIPLES. 

deemed  essential  to  salvation,  the  motive  to  extend 
its  efficacy  to  every  individual  who  might,  by  pos- 
sibility, be  qualified  to  receive  it,  is  irresistible.  It 
would  be  administered  first  to  the  sick — then  to 
persons  of  very  tender  age — then  to  children,  whose 
capacity  for  the  exercise  of  faith  is  very  doubtful — 
and  finally  to  unconscious  infants.  The  considera- 
tion that  none  could  be  saved  without  baptism,  and 
that  its  performance  could  do  no  serious  injury, 
would  lead  from  step  to  step  in  the  path  of  error, 
till  the  design  and  spirit  of  the  ordinance  would  be 
lost  and  forgotten.     I  inquire — • 

5.  What  will  be  the  condition  of  a  believer  dying 
without  baptism  ?  I  have  already  shown  conclu- 
sively that  the  believer. is  "  born  of  God" — that  he 
possesses  "  everlasting  life,''  and  that  he  is  a  child 
of  God  ;  and  yet,  agreeably  to  the  theory  under  con- 
sideration, '"'  unpardoned,  unjustified,  unsaved,"  &c. 
In  this  condition  he  may  unquestionably  die.  What 
would  become  of  him  ?  He  could  not  be  received 
into  heaven  without  pardon,  and  consequently  in 
his  sins  ;  nor  would  he  be  sent  to  perdition,  with  a 
regenerate  heart,  and  possessing  eternal  life.  There 
would  be  no  place  for  him  but  purgatory.  And  yet, 
in  the  opinion  of  Protestants,  there  is  no  such  place 
as  purgatory.  I  leave  him  to  be  extricated  from 
his  dilemma  by  those  whose  unscriptural,  I  had 
almost  said  absi  :d,  dogma  has  placed  him  in  it. 

Iicistly.     Mr    Campbell  recoils  from  the  conse- 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES.  257 

quences  of  his  own  doctrine.  If,  as  he  maintains, 
Peter  "made  repentance,  or  reformation,  and  im- 
mersion equall'j  necessary  to  forgiveness"  then  it  is 
as  clear  as  the  noon-day  sun,  that  no  man  can  be  a 
Christian,  and  no  man  who  hears,  or  has  an  oppor- 
tunity of  hearing  the  Gospel,  can  be  saved,  in  time 
or  eternity,  without  immersion.  Can  a  man  be  a 
Christian  without  repentance  ?  Can  a  man,  under 
the  light  of  the  Gospel,  be  saved  without  repent- 
ance ?  Mr.  Campbell  will  hardly  answer  these 
questions  in  the  affirmative.  But  if  immersion  and 
repentance  are  equally  necessary  to  forgiveness,  then 
no  man  can  be  a  Christian,  or  be  saved,  without 
immersion,  except,  indeed,  a  man  maybe  a  Chris- 
tian or  be  saved,  without  forgiveness.  Mr.  Camp- 
bell seems  sometimes  half  inclined  to  look  this 
consequence  full  in  the  face.  "  Infants,"  he  says, 
"  idiots,  deaf  and  dumb  persons,  innocent  Pagans, 
wherever  they  can  be  found,  with  all  the  pious 
Poedohaptists,  we  commend  to  the  mercy  of  God." 
Chn.  Sys.,  233.  As  there  is  no  promise  of  their 
salvation,  he  turns  over  all  pious  Piedobaptists, 
and,  of  course,  all  other  unimmersed  believers,  with 
infants,  idiots,  &c.,  to  the  "  uncovenanted  mercies 
of  God."  At  another  time,  when  a  milder  spirit 
rules  him,  or,  more  probably,  when  his  system  ie 
out  of  view,  he  writes,  in  a  measure,  like  an  unre 
formed  Christian  minister.  "  Amongst  them  all,' 
be  says,  alluding  to  the  Christian  sects,  "  we  than) 


258  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES, 

the  grace  of  God,  that  there  are  many  who  believe 
in,  and  love  the  Saviour,  and  that,  though  we  may 
not  have  Christian  churches,  we  have  many  Chris- 
tians." Camp,  on  Baptism,  p.  16.  Yes  !  thanks 
to  "  the  grace  of  God,"  we  have  "  many  Christians,'* 
without  immersion,  without  conversion,  without  re- 
generation, and  without  the  remission  of  sins  !  !  It 
is  exceedingly  difficult  for  error  to  be  consistent  with 
itself.  Mr.  Campbell  shows  in  this  admission  that 
he  does  not  fully  believe  his  own  doctrine.  He  is 
forced,  in  spite  of  his  system,  to  concede  that  repent- 
ance and  immersion,  are  not  equally  necessary  to 
secure  the  remission  of  sins. 

If  baptism,  as  I  have  endeavored  to  show,  is  not 
a  condition,  or  means  of  obtaining  the  remission  of 
sin,  then  it  follows  that  it  is  a  symbolic  declaration 
of  the  remission  of  sins  already  obtained  through 
faith  in  Christ.  In  support  of  this  conclusion,  I 
remark. 

First — That  it  is  in  perfect  harmony  with  the 
teaching  of  the  Scriptures.  This  point  has  been 
sufficiently  elucidated,  and  the  reader  must  judge 
of  it  for  himself. 

Secondly — That  it  is  according  to  analogy.  There 
are  two  New  Testament  institutions — ^baptism  and 
the  Lord's  supper.  The  latter  is  unquestionably  a 
symbolic  ordinance.  Bread  and  wine  are  used  to 
symbolize  the  broken  body,  and  sin-atoning  blood  of 
Jesus.     May  we  not  reast mably  infer  that  both  ordi- 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   PRINCIPLES.  259 

nances  are  of  the  sarae  general  nature — that  as  one 
is  symbolic  so  is  the  other  ?  ^If  we  do  not  literally, 
but  only  in  a  figure  eat  the-  Lord's  body,  and  drink 
his  blood,  in  the  supper,  does  it  not  seem  probable 
that  our  sins  are  not  literally,  but  only  in  a  figure, 
washed  away  in  baptism  ?  As  we  do  not  derogate 
from  the  importance  of  the  Lord's  supper,  but  as- 
sign to  it  its  true  position  in  the  Christian  system, 
as  a  means  of  promoting  the  edification  and  piety 
of  believers,  by  insisting  on  its  symbolic  character  ; 
so  neither  do  we  derogate  from  the  scriptural  im- 
portance of  baptism,  by  maintaining  that  sins  are 
not  literally  but  only  in  a  figure  remitted  by  it. 
The  Papists  interpret  the  language  relating  to  tho 
Christian  ordinances  with  perfect  consistency. 
They  carry  out  the  principle  of  a  literal  exposition. 
They  maintain  that  in  the  eucharist  the  body  of 
Christ  is  literally  eaten,  and  his  blood  literally 
drunk,  and  that  in  baptism  sins  are  literally  washed 
away.  But  are  they  consistent  expositors  of  Scrip- 
ture who  teach  that  in  the  eucharist  we  eat  the 
body,  and  drink  the  blood  of  Christ  in  a  figure,  but 
that  in  baptism  our  sins  are  literally,  really  washed 
away  ?  I  think  not.  In  the  same  sense  in  which 
the  broken  loaf  in  the  Lord's  supper  is  a  sign  of  the 
crucified  body  of  Jesus,  is  the  water  of  baptism  a 
sign  of  the  cleansing  efiicacy  of  the  blood,  or 
atnnomert  of  Christ.     In  like  manner  as  we  eat  the 


260  CAMrBELLISM   IN   ITS   PEINCIPLis. 

body  of  Clirist  in  tlie  supper,  do  we  wasl^  away  our 
sins  in  baptism.         .  I 

Thirdly — That  it  is  rn  hannony  with  what  Paul 
affirms  of  himself.  1  Cor.  1:  17."  "Christ  sent 
me  not  to  baptize,  but  to  preach  the  Gospel."  The 
apostle  did  not  mean  that  he  was  unauthorized  to 
perform  the  rite  of  baptism ;  for\  he  baptized 
Crispus  and  Gains,  and  the  household  of  Stephanus, 
and  perhaps  some  others  ;  and  he  would  not  have 
baptized  them  without  authority.  The  commission 
to  preach  is  co-extensive  with  the  commission  to 
baptize.  The  apostle  clearly  meant,  "  Christ  sent 
me  not  (mainly)  to  baptize,  but  to  preach  the  Gos- 
pel." Baptism  was  not  unimportant — it  was  a 
solemn  duty — an  impressive  ordinance — a  symbolic 
rite  ;  but  preaching  the  Gospel  was  the  great,  su- 
preme business  of  Paul,  as  it  should  be  of  every 
Christian  minister.  If,  however,  baptism  is  the  re- 
generating act,  and  as  essei^tial  to  forgiveness  as  re- 
pentance, I  ask  any  candid  and  discerning  man, 
whether  Paul  could  have  used  such  language  ?  ■"  I 
thank  God,"  said  he,  "I  baptized  (regenerated) 
none  of  you  but  Crispus  and  Gains."  Thank  God 
I  did  not  do  the  very  thing  without  which  my 
preaching  is  vain — ^your  faith  is  vain — and  your  sins 
cannot  be  forgiven  !  His  language  is  most  dis- 
cordant with  the  theory  of  baptismal  remission  ; 
but  strikingly  harmonizes  with  the  conclusion  I  am 
aimins;   to    e«itablish.     The   blood    of    Christ — the 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES  261 

publication  of  the  Gospel — the  influence  of  the 
Holy  Spirit — repentance — ^faith — regeneration — arc 
indispensable  to  salvation  ;^  and  baptism  is  an  open, 
solemn  achnowledgment,  or  declaration  that  salva- 
tion is  received  and  enjoyed,  through  the  blood  of 
Christ,  by  repentance  and  faith,  produced  tlpough 
the  agency  «of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

I  will  now  endeavor  briefly  to  show  that  the  pas- 
sages of  Scripture  principally  relied  on  by  Mr. 
CamplJell  for  the  support  of  his  doctrine,  utterly 
fail  of  establishing  it,  and  are  in  agreement  with  the 
theory  of  symbolic  remission  maintained  in  this 
chapter. 

To  begin  with  the  commission,  Mark  16  :  16. 
The  assurance  that  "  He  that  believeth  and  is  bap- 
tized shall  be  saved,"  does  by  no  means  warrant  the 
conclusion  that  the  remission  of  sins  does  not  pre- 
cede baptism.  There  is  perfect  accordance  between 
this  promise  and  the  plain,  literal  declaration  of 
Jesus,  that  "  He  that  believeth  on  the  Son  is  not 
condemned."  Certainly,  if  he  that  believes  on  the 
Son  is  not  condemned,  he  who  not  only  believes  in 
the  Son,  but,  in  submission  to  his  authority,  is  bap- 
tized, is  not  condemned. 

Let  us  next  notice  the  famous  passage  in  this  con- 
troversy. Acts  2  :  38.  "  Repent  and  be  baptized 
every  one  of  you  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ, /or 
the  remission  of  siris  and  ye  shall  receive  the  gifk 
of  the  Holy  Ghost."     That  baptism  is  for  the  re- 


2G2  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PEINCIPLES, 

mission  of  siiis  uone  will  deny.  But  the  import  of 
the  passage  turns  on  the  force  of  the  term  ^'for." 
In  the  Grreek  the  preposition  eic  is  used.  Every  ( 
scholar  knows,  and  every  intelligent  reader  may 
learn  from  unquestionable  authority,  that  it  bears 
in  the  New  Testament  various  meanings.  It  is 
sometimes,  but  rarely,  rendered  /or,  in  the  sense  of, 
"  in  order  to."  Its  usual  rendering  is  into.  A 
regard  to  the  context,  the  sense  of  the  passage,  and 
other  considerations,  must  determine  its  import  in 
any  particular  place.  It  is  only  necessary  to  show 
that  on  sound  principles  of  hermeneutics,  it  may  be 
fairly  ijnderstood  in  harmony  with  what  I  have  en- 
deavored to  prove  is  the  plain  doctrine  of  the 
Scriptures,  and  this  can  easily  be  done.  In  Mat. 
3  :  11,  we  have  these  words — "  I  indeed  baptize 
you  with  water  U7ito  («f)  repentance."  Here  the 
term  cannot  without  gross  impropriety  be  rendered 
for,  or  in  order  to.  We  know  that  John  did  not 
baptize  his  disciples  in  order  thaP'they  might  re- 
pent. He  demanded  of*tnem  not  only  repentance, 
but  fruits  meet  for  repentance,  before  he  admitted 
them  to  baptism.  He  baptized  them,  not  that  they 
mightip^tain  repentance,  but  as  a  sign,  or  acknow- 
ledgment that  they  had  repented.  Mat.  3  :  8-9. 
Now,  in  the  very  sense  in  which  the  Harbinger  bap- 
tized his  disciples  {dg)  unto,  for,  into  repentance, 
did  Peter  command  his  pentecostal  hearers  to  he 
baptized  (f/r)  for,  untc,  into  the  remfesion   of  sins — 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES,  263 

that  is,  not  to  procure,  but  as  a  sign,  or  acknowl- 
edgment of,  this  privilege,  which  God  has  graciously 
and  inseparably  united  with  repentance  and  faith. 
I  could  produce  many  similar  examples,  but  this 
will  suffice  to  show  how  fairly  the  passage  harmo- 
nizes with  the  symbolic  theory  of  baptism. 

On  Acts  22  :  16,  it  is  needless  to  add  any  thing 
to  the  remarks  which  I  have  already  made  on  the 
figurative  import  of  the  ordinance. 

"  Jesus  answered,  verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  thee, 
Except  a  man  he  horn  of  water,  and  of  the  Spirit,  he 
cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God."     John  3 :  5. 

The  Keformers  quote  this  text  with  great  confi- 
dence in  support  of  their  views.  Let  us  candidly 
examine  it.  The  phrase  yevrr/O^ j/f iJarof — "born 
of  water,"  does  not  elsewhere  occur  in  the  Scrip- 
tures. Its  import  must  be  learned  from  the  lan- 
guage itself,  the  context,  and  the  current  teaching 
of  revelation.  What  is  its  meaning  ?  Mr.  Camp- 
bell maintains  that  it  means  baptism,  and  founds 
his  argument  for  baptismal  remission  wholly  on  this 
interpretation.  Concerning  this  opinion,  I  have 
several  remarks  to  ofler — 

First.  It  is  perfectly  gratuitous.  No  argument 
has  been  presented,  and  none,  it  is  presumed,  can 
be,  in  its  support.  All  that  can  bo  plausibly  said 
in  favor  of  it  is,  that  if  the  phrase  does  not  mean 
baptism,  it  is  not  eas}  to  perceive  what  it  does  mean. 


264  CAMi^BELLISM   i>f    ITS    PRINCIPLES, 

Now  I  protest  against  building  so  important  a  theory 
as  baptismal  remission  on  a  mere  assumption. 

Secondly.  Mr,  Campbell  relies  on  authority  for 
the  confirmation  of  bis  opinion,  "  This/'  he  says, 
"  is  neither  an  interpretation  of  my  own,  nor  of 
modern  times  ;  but  if  ever  there  was  a  Catholic  in- 
terpretation— not  Eoman  Catholic  or  Greek  Catholic 
— but  if  ever  there  was  a  Catholic  interpretation,  it 
is  the  interpretation  which  I  have  given  ;  for  all 
agree  to  it,  both  ancient  and  modern."  Debate  with 
Rice,  p.  481.  It  must  be  conceded  that  the  pre- 
ponderance of  authority  is  fn  favor  of  this  interpre- 
tation. This,  however,  is  only  a  part  of  the  truth. 
A  majority  of  "  ancient  and  modern"  writers,  espe- 
cially of  the  "Greek  and  Latin  Fathers,"  on  whose 
concurrent  judgment  Mr.  C.  relies  for  the  support 
of  his  interpretation,  cast  the  weight  of  their  au- 
thority not  only  in  favor  of  baptismal  remission, 
which  he  believes,  but  of  baptismal  regeneration, 
which  he  rejects.  This  text  is  the  stronghold  of  the 
doctrine.  A  misconception  of  its  meaning  was  the 
root  of  that  most  prevalent  error,  infant  baptism. 
Besides,  no  man  has  less  respect  for  human  author- 
ity than  Mr.  Campbell,  when  it  is  in  conflict  with 
his  own  views. 

Thirdly.  It  makes  Christ's  answer  to  Nicodemus 
irrelevant.  The  Saviour  said  to  the  Rabbi,  "  Verily, 
verily,  I  say  unto  thee,  except  a  man  be  born  again, 
he  cannot  see  the  kingdom  of  God,"     The  Jewish 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS    PKINCIPLES.  265 

ruler  did  not  understand  the  language — attached  a 
gross,  sensual  meaning  to  it — and  demanded  an  ex- 
planation of  it,  "  How,"  said  he,  "  can  these 
things  be  ?"  According  to  the  popular  interpreta- 
tion, Christ,  instead  of  answering  the  question, 
merely  combined  with  the  obscure  proposition,  an- 
other, which  must  have  been  perfectly  unintelligible 
to  Nicodemus.  If  the  great  Teacher  employed  a 
figurative  phrase,  well  understood  among  the  intel- 
ligent Jewish  rulers,  to  elucidate  the  nature  of  the 
spiritual  birth,  his  answer  was  in  harmony  with  the 
question  of  Nicodemus,  and  the  whole  context ;  but 
if  he  used  a  phrase  never  before  nor  afterwards  em- 
ployed, by  an  inspired  teacher,  to  denote  baptism, 
his  language  was  adapted  to  confound  rather  than 
instruct  the  neophyte. 

Fourthly.  It  fully  justifies  the  ignorance  of  the 
Jewish  ruler,  I  take  it  for  granted,  that  Christ  in- 
tended to  be  understood  by  Nicodemus,  and  used 
such  language  as  a  suitably  qualified  ruler  of  the 
Jews  could  have  comprehended,  Christ  reproved 
his  pupil  for  his  inexcusable  ignorance — "Art  thou 
a  master  of  Israel,  and  knowest  not  these  things  ?" 
But  how  could  a  teacher  in  Israel  be  censurable  for 
not  understanding  phrases  peculiar  to  Christianity 
— nay,  a  doctrine  which  had  never  before  been  enim- 
ciated  ?  If  Christ  meant  to  teach  Nicodemus  that 
he  must  be  baptized  before  he  could  enter  into  the 
kingdom  of  God,  h^  employed  language  which  it 


266  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

was  impossible  for  the  ruler  to  compreliend,  and 
then  reproved  him  for  his  official  ignorance.  But 
Christ  did  not  reprove  the  master  unjustly.  He 
ought  as  a  Jewish  teacher,  and  as  a  student  of  the 
Scriptures,  and  of  Rabbinical  writings,  to  have  un- 
derstood the  language  used  by  the  Redeemer  for 
illustrating  the  nature  of  the  new  birth. 

Fifthly.  It  makes  the  answer  of  Christ  to  Nico- 
demus/a?se.  The  "kingdom  of  God"  must  mean 
the  church  of  Christ — on  earth,  or  the  state  of 
heavenly  glory..  This  position,  it  is  presumed,  will 
not  be  called  in  question.  Now  it  is  not  true  that 
none  enter  into  the  visible  church  on  earth,  who  are 
not  bom  of  the  Spirit.  In  the  purest  churches 
there  are  members  who  are  not  regenerated.  In 
the  apostolic  churches,  there  were  some  who  were 
not  properly  of  them.  "  They  went  out  from  us," 
said  John,  "  but  they  were  not  of  us  ;  for  if  they 
had  been  of  us,  they  would  have  continued  with  us." 
1  Jno.  2 :  19.  ^  The  kingdom  of  heaven  is  like  a  net, 
which  gathers  both  good  and  bad.  Mat.  13  :  47-48. 
Nor  is  it  true,  that  none  enter  into  the  heavenly 
glory  who  are  not  baptized.  From  this  conclusion, 
though  it  follows  legitimately  from  his  doctrine,  Mr. 
Campbell  himself  recoils.  Tlje  Saviour's  declara- 
tion then,  as  interpreted  by  the.  Reformers,  and 
many  others,  is  not  true.  There  is  but  one  method 
of  evading  this  conclusion.  It  is  sometimes  affirmed, 
for  the  purpose  of  avoiding  it,  that  a  man  cannot 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES.  267 

constitutionally  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God,  ex- 
cept he  is  baptized,  and  born  of  the  Spirit.  But, 
by  what  authority  is  this  long  word  foisted  in  the 
passage  ?  There  is  nothing  in  the  context  to  jus- 
tify its  insertion.  Christ  affirms  positively,  and 
without  limitation,  "Except  a  man  be  born  of 
water,  and  of  the  Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into  the 
kingdom  of  God." 

Lastly. — If  the  phrase  "bom  of  water"  means 
immersion,  the  passage  in  which  it  is  found  yields 
no  support  to  the  doctrine  of  baptismal  remission. 
If  the  "  kingdom  of  God  "  means,  as  Mr.  Campbell 
understands  it  to  mean,  the  reign  of  Messiah  on 
earth — the  visible  church — then  the  text  proves 
merely  that  a  man  cannot  enter  the  church  without 
baptism,  and  leaves  the  subject  of  the  remission  of 
sins,  wholly  untouched.  So  far  as  this  passage 
teaches  us,  a  man  may  be  pardoned  before,  or  after, 
as  well  as  in  the  act  of  immersion.  It  has  no  rele- 
vancy to  the  subject  under  discussion. 

But  what  does  the  text  under  discussion  mean  ? 
It  is  not  incumbent  on  me  to  show  its  meaning.  I  have 
proved  that  it  does  not  refer  to  baptism,  and  that  if 
it  does,  it  fails  to  support  the  doctrine  of  baptismal 
remission — this  is  sufficient  for  my  purpose.  I  will, 
however,  perform  a  work  of  supererogation.  I  will 
quote  on  this  subject  a  passage  from  a  sermon  of 
the  Rev.  James  Saurin,  formerly  pastor  of  the 
French  church  at  the  Hague,  celebrated  alike  for 


268  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

his  learning,  eloquence  and  piety.  "  The  phrase," 
says  this  incomparable  writer,  "  to  he  horn  of  water 
and  of  the  Spirit,  is  a  Hehraical  phraseology,  im- 
porting to  he  horn  of  spiritual  water.  By  a  similar 
expression,  it  is  said  in  the  3d  chapter  of  St.  Mat- 
thew, '  I  indeed  (says  John  the  Baptist)  baptize  you 
with  water  unto  repentance,  but  there  cometh  after 
me  one  mightier  than  I ;  he  shall  baptize  you  with 
the  Holy  Ghost  and  with  fire  ;'  that  is,  with  spirit- 
ual life" — (fire,  I  presume,  is  meant.)  ..."  The 
Jews  call  the  change  which  they  presume  their 
proselytes  had  experienced,  a  spiritual  birth  ;  a  new 
hirth  ;  a  regeneration.  It  was  one  of  their  maxims 
that  the  moment  a  man  became  a  proselyte,  he  was 
regarded  as  a  child,  once  born  in  sin,  but  now  born 
in  lioliness.  .  .  .  Though  it  be  not  necessary  to 
prove  by  numerous  authorities  the  first  remark  we 
shall  make  on  the  words  of  Christ,  '  To  be  born  of 
spiritual  water,'  and  to  be  '  born  again,'  it  is  proper 
at  least  to  propose  it ;  otherwise  it  would  be  diffi- 
cult to  account  for  our  Saviour's  reproving  Nico- 
demus  as  being  '  a  master  in  Israel,  and  not  knowing 
these  things.'  For  a  doctor  in  the  law  does  not 
seem  reprehensible  for  not  understanding  a  language 
peculiar  to  Jesus  Christ,  and  till  then  unheard  of ; 
whereas  the  blame  naturally  devolved  on  this  Jew 
ft)r  exclaiming  at  expressions  familiar  to  the  Kabbins." 
Saurin's   Sermons,  trar  slated  from  the  French,  by 


f  AMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   PRINCIPLES.  269 

Kev,   Kobert   Eobinson,  and  others.     Vol.  2,  pp. 
419,  420. 

"  Christ  alsc  loved  the  church,  and  gave  himself 
for  it  ;  that  lie  migJit'  sanctify  and  cleanse  it  with 
the  washing  of  water  hy  the  word."  Eph.  5  :  25, 26. 
This  text  is  adduced  by  Mr.  Campbell  with  great 
confidence  in  support  of  his  cherished  theory,  that 
sins  are  remitted  in  the  very  act  of  immersion.  Let 
us  patiently  examine  it.  Several  remarks  made  in 
the  investigation  of  John  3  :  5,  are  equally  appli- 
cable to  the  passage  in  hand.  That  the  phrase, 
KaOapiaoQ  tu  /uwrp^  tov  vdarog,  that  he  might  ^'  clcanse 
it  by  the  washing  of  water,"  which  occurs  nowhere 
else  in  the  New  ^Testament,  means  baptism,  is  simply 
an  assumption,  and  cannot  be  proved.  The  weight 
of  authority  is  in  favor  of  this  interpretation,  but  a 
large  measure  of  it,  both  Komanist  and  Protestant, 
presses  the  text  into  the  service  of  baptismal  regen- 
eration. But  admitting,  for  the  sake  of  argument, 
that  the  phrase  means  baptism,  the  passage  cannot, 
with  any  fairness,  be  offered  in  support  of  baptismal 
remission.  The  reader  must  keep  his  eye  on  the 
question  at  issue,  Are  sins  forgiven  in  baptism  ? 
Christ  gave  himself  for  the  church  that  he  might 
sanctify  and  cleanse  it  toith  the  washing  of  water — 
baptism  by  the  word.  Christ  does  two  things  for  the 
church,  sanctifies  and  cleanses  it,  with  the  washing 
of  water.  Now,  the  first  of  these  terms,  in  the  usus 
loqwndi  of  the  Nev  Testament,  never  refers  to  a 


270  CiMPBELLlSM  IN   ITS    PRINCIPLES. 

change  of  state,  or  the  remission  of  sins,  but  in- 
variably to  a  moral  change.  The  term  ayiaari^  from 
dyiuCu,  to  separate,  consecrate,  purify,  "  sanctify," 
is  never  used  by  any  insjpired  writer  to  denote 
pardon  or  justification.  It  is,  as  has  already  been 
shown,  distinguished  from  justification.  1  Cor.  6  : 
11.  It  means  to  make  holy.  "  The  very  Grod  of 
peace  sanctify  you  wholly."  1  Thess.  5  :  23.  "  He 
that  is  holy,  let  him  he  holy  still."  Kev.  22  :  11.  If 
there  is  a  respectable  author  in  the  English  tongue, 
except  those  who  use  the  Bethany  dialect,  who  gives 
it  any  other  meaning,  I  have  yet  to  learn  who  he 
is.  The  word  Kadapiaag^  from  KadapKu,  to  cleanse, 
render  pure,  to  free  from  the  influence  of  error  and 
sin,  is  nearly  as  unfavorable  to  the  argument  of  Mr. 
Campbell.  It  is  used  to  denote  the  healing  of  the 
leper  :  "  Lord,  if  thou  wilt,  thou  canst  make  me 
clean."  Matt.  8:2,  It  is  employed  to  signify  the 
process  of  moral  purification  in  the  redeemed : 
"  Let  us  cleanse  ourselves  from  all  filthiness  of  the 
flesh  and  spirit,  perfecting  holiness  in  the  fear  of 
God."  2  Cor.  7:  1.  "Who  gave  himself  for  us, 
that  he  might  redeem  us  from  all  iniquity,  and 
jpurify  unto  himself  a  peculiar  people,  zealous  of 
good  works."  Tit.  2  :  14.  In  one  place,  the  word 
probably  refers  to  the  removal  of  guilt  from  the  con- 
science by  the  blood  of  Christ.  Hob.  9  :  14.  In 
every  other  passage,  where  it  relates  to  the  redemp- 
tion of  men,  it  denotes  a  moral  renovation.     That 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES.  271 

both  sanctify  and  cleanse,  "have,  in  the  text  under 
consideration,  reference  to  a  moral  purification, 
seems  to  be  beyond  reasonable  dispute.  The  Apostle 
tells  us  distinctly  for  ■what  purpose  Chusi  sanctifies 
and  cleanses  the  church,  with  the  washing  of  water, 
by  the  word.  It  is  that  he  may  present  it  to  him- 
self "  a  glorious  churchy  not  having  spot,  or  wrinkle, 
or  any  such  thing,  but  that  it  should  be  holy,  and 
without  blemish"  These  are  clearly  moral  effects — 
effects  in  harmony  with  the  universal  meaning  of 
the  word  sanctify,  and  almost  universal  meaning 
of  the  word  cleanse.  Christ  proposes  to  puiify, 
adorn,  and  perfect  his  church  "  with  the  washing 
of  water  by  the  word.''  If  the  phrase  "  washing  of 
water"  means  baptism,  then  the  text  teaches,  not  the 
remission  of  sins  in  the  act  of  baptism,  but  rather 
baptismal  regeneration  and  sanctification.  At  any 
rate  it  will  be  the  business  of  those  who  contend  for 
that  meaning  of  the  phrase,  to  free  the  passage  from 
a  consequence  which  is  exceedingly  plausible,  if  it 
is  not  legitimate.  But  are  such  moral  effects  as  the 
Apostle  so  gi-aphically  describes  attributable  to  bap- 
tism ?  This  moral  cleansing  is  ascribed  to  faith — 
"  Purifying  their  hearts  by  faith."  Acts  15  :  9  ;  to 
the  loord  of  God — "  Seeing  ye  have  purified  your 
souls  in  obeying  the  truth,  through  the  Spirit  ;"  1 
Peter  1  :  22,  and  to  the  hlood  of  Christ—''  The 
blofMl  of  Jesus  Christ  his  Son,  cleanscth  us  from  all 
sip   "  1  Jno.  ".  :  7,  but  never,  unless  it  be  in  the  text 


272  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES. 

under  examination,  to  baptism.  There  is,  indeed, 
a  XovTpov^  or  bath,  which  cleanses  the  soul,  as  the 
washing  of  water  cleanses  the  body  ;  but  this  bath 
is  not  baptism.  "In  that  day,  there  shall  be  a 
fountain  opened  to  the  house  of  David,  and  to  the 
inhabitants  of  Jerusalem,  for  sin  and  for  unclean- 
ness."  Zee.  13  :  1.  He  has  a  poor  conception  of 
this  sin-cleansing  fountain,  who  supposes  that  it  is 
baptism.  Multitudes  have  been  baptized  who  have 
not  been  cleansed  from  sin  and  uncleanness  ;  and  as 
many  have  been  cleansed  who  have  not  been  bap- 
tized. This  soul-cleansing  fountain  is  beautifully 
described  by  England's  evangelic  bard  : — 

"  There  is  a  fountain  filled  with  blood, 

Drawn  from  Immanuel's  veins ; 
And  sinners,  plunged  beneath  that  flood. 

Lose  all  their  guilty  stains." 

The  same  wondrous  fountain  is  portrayed,  with 
different  imagery,  by  one  less  gifted  in  song,  but 
not  less  fervent  in  spirit,  or  learned  in  the  Scrip- 
tures, than  was  the  gentle  Cowper. 

"  Here  at  Bethesda's  pool,  the  poor, 

The  withered,  halt,  and  blind, 
With  waiting  hearts  expect  a  cure, 

And  free  admittance  find. 
.A 

Here  streams  of  wondrous  virtue  flow. 

To  heal  a  sin-sick  soul ; 
To  wash  the  filthy  white  as  snow, 

And  maJ-  ->  the  wounded  who^c." 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES.  273 

Whetlier  the  blood  of  Christ,  or  the  Gospel 
which  reveals  the  efficacy  of  that  blood,  be  con- 
sidered the  fountain,  is  not  material — ^for  these 
things  are  inseparable — this  is  the  true  loutron — 
the  soul-purifying  bath.  In  this  the  church  is  sanc- 
tified and  cleansed,  and  made  "  a  glorious  church, 
not  having  spot,  or  wrinkle,  or  any  such  thing." 

I  see  but  one  method  of  attempting  to  evade  the 
force  of  the  above  reasoning.  It  may  be  said  that 
"  Christ  loved  the  church  and  gave  himself  for  it," 
to  deliver  it  from  the  guilt  as  well  as  the  pollution 
of  sin — to  secure  for  it  the  remission  of  sins,  as  well 
as  sanctification.  This  is  readily  granted.  Some 
passages  of  Scripture,  however,  display  the  grace 
of  God,  and  the  efficacy  of  Christ's  blood,  in  the 
remission  of  sins,  without  any  allusion  to  sanctifica- 
tion. "  Being  justified  freely  by  his  grace  through 
the  redemption  that  is  in  Christ  Jesus."  Kom.  3  : 
24.  In  other  passages  the  purifying  efficacy  of 
Christ's  blood  is  exhibited  without  any  reference  to 
justification — "  Jesus  also  that  he  might  sanctify 
the  people  with  his  own  blood,  suffered  without  the 
gate,"  Heb.  13  :  12.  The  text  we  are  discussing 
belongs  to  the  latter  class  of  Scriptures.  Christ 
gave  himself  for  the  church  that  he  might  sanctify 
and  cleanse  it — and  by  so  doing  make  it  holy, 
faultless  and  glorious — worthy  of  himself.  Remis- 
sion of  sins  is  a  blessing  which  believers  derive  from 
Christ — and  this  truth  is  plainly  taught  in  many 


274  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

portions  of  the  Bible  ;  but  this  Scripture  has  no 
reference  to  the  remission  of  sins,  and  consequently 
cannot  prove  that  they  are  remitted  in  the  moment 
of  baptism. 

"According  to  liis  mercy  7ie  saved  us,  hy  the 
washing  of  regeneration  and  renewing  of  the  Holy 
Ghost."     Titus  3  :  5. 

"  The  like  figure  whereunto  even  haptism  doth 
also  now  save  us  (not  the  putting  away  of  the  filth 
of  the  flesh,  but  the  answer  of  a  good  conscience 
toward  God,)  by  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ." 
1  Peter  3  :  21. 

These  two  passages  may  be  conveniently  ex- 
amined together. 

The  phrase  "  washing  of  regeneration"  is  found 
no  where  in  the  Scriptures  but  in  the  text  cited 
from  the  epistle  to  Titus.  It  is  generally,  not 
universally  supposed  to  signify  baptism.  That  it 
does  cannot  be  proved.  My  own  opinion  is,  that  it 
is  exegetical  of  the  following  words,  "  renewing  of 
the  Holy  Ghost."  Regeneration  is  called  a  wash- 
ing, because  it  is  a  moral  cleansing  ;  and  this  wash- 
ing is  precisely  equivalent  to  the  "  renewing  of  the 
Holy  Ghost."  The  text  may  be  rendered  "  the 
washing  of  regeneration  even  {nai)  the  renewing  of 
the  Holy  Ghost."  The  Greek  participle  koi  is  fre- 
quently rendered  even  in  the  New  Testament, 
Mat.  8  :  27    25  :  29.  Mark  6  :  12,  &c.  But,  so  fai 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES.  275 

as  this  argument  is  concerned,  I  will  admit  that  the 
words  "  washing  of  regeneration"  mean  baptism. 

The  text  above  cited  from  Peter  is  one  of  the 
most  obscure  in  the  apostolic  epistles.  Commenta- 
tors have  been  greatly  perplexed  and  divided  con- 
cerning its  import.  As  it  is  not  necessary  for  ray 
purpose,  I  shall  not  attempt  to  expound  it. 

Do  these  Scriptures  teach  that  the  sins  of  a  be- 
liever are  remitted  in  the  act  of  baptism  ?  This  is 
the  question  under  discussion.  God  saves  us,  "  by 
the  washing  of  regeneration  (baptism)  and  renewing 
Df  the  Holy  Ghost."  "  Baptism  doth  also  now  save 
as." 

The  term  salvation  is  of  comprehensive  import. 
It  denotes  the  whole  process  by  which  we  are  de- 
livered from  sin,  and  fitted  for  the  enjoyment  of 
heaven.  It  includes  a  thorough  moral  renovation, 
the  remission  of  sins,  adoption  into  the  family  of 
God,  and  perseverance  unto  death  in  the  way  of 
holiness.  It  is  commenced  in  repentance,  carried 
forward  in  sanctification,  and  will  be  completed  by 
the  resurrection  from  the  dead.  The  sincere  be- 
liever in  Christ,  even  before  baptism,  is  in  a  state 
of  salvation,  but  his  salvation  is  incomplete.  Now, 
God  saves  us  by  all  the  means  which  he  employs  to 
instruct,  impress,  purify,  and  preserve  us.  The 
written  word,  the  ministry  of  the  word,  meditation, 
prayer,  baptism,  the  Lord's  Supper,  aflSictions,  are 
all  means  by  which  God  s'lves  us.     We  are  said  to 


276  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

"be  saved  by  faith — saved  by  hope — to  save  ourselves 
and  others,  1  Tim.  4  :  10 — to  work  out  our  own  sal- 
vation, Phil.  2  :  12.  Salvation  is  promised  to  him 
that  endureth  to  the  end.  Matt,  16  :  22.  Christ  is 
the  author  of  eternal  salvation  to  all  them  that  obey 
him.  Heb.  5:9.  And  we  are  saved  by  baptism. 
All  these  things  have  an  influence  in  securing  our 
salvation — are  among  the  means  by  which  God,  in 
his  mercy,  carries  on  and  completes  the  work.  Bap- 
tism, which  symbolizes  the  regenerating  influence 
of  the  Spirit  of  God,  and  is  a  public  and  solemn 
acknowledgment  of  the  remission  of  sins  through 
faith  in  Christ,  is  designed  and  fitted  to  separate  us 
from  the  world,  impress  on  us  our  obligations  to 
Christ,  and  aid  us  in  the  pathway  to  heaven.  It 
certainly,  however,  does  not  follow  from  this  posi- 
tion that  the  remission  of  sins  is  suspended  on  the 
act  of  baptism.  This  conclusion  is  drawn  from  the 
assumption,  that  whatever  promotes  our  salvation 
is  essential  to  the  forgiveness  of  sins — an  assumption 
manifestly  false.  "He  that  endureth  to  the  end 
shall  be  saved" — ^but  is  the  believer  unpardoned 
until  he  finishes  his  race  ?  or,  is  he  not  pardoned  at 
the  commencement  of  it  ?  Christians  are  exhorted 
to  work  out  their  own  salvation — ^but  aie  not  their 
sins  forgiven  before  the  completion  of  the  work  ? 
We  are  saved  by  baptism — not  as  a  condition  of 
obtaining  the  remission  of  sins,  but  as  one  of  the 
means  which  God  employs  to  perfect  the  work  of 


:ampbellism  in  its  principles.         277 

our  salvation  ;  a  means  not  indispensable  to  that 
result. 

The  remaining  propositions  of  the  Extra,  I  will 
very  briefly  dispose  of. 

The  tentJi  sets  forth  that  "  immersion  and  loash- 
ing  of  regeneration  are  two  Bible  names  for  the 
same  act."  Chn'ty  Restored,  p.  223.  Mr.  Camp- 
bell's views  on  regeneration,  having  a  very  looise 
connexion  with  the  subject  of  the  remission  of  sins, 
I  have  pretty  fully  discussed  in  another  place,  and 
will  dismiss  without  farther  remarks. 

Under  the  eleventh  proposition,  Mr.  Campbell 
furnishes  a  long  list  of  authorities  to  prove  that  the* 
early  Christian  Fathers  considered  immersion  as  the 
^^regeneration"  and  "  remission  of  sins,"  spoken  of 
in  the  New  Testament.  If  this  was  the  testimony 
of  the  Fathers,  it  differs  very  widely,  on  one  point, 
from  Mr.  Campbell's  system.  "  All  the  Apostolic 
Fathers,"  says  the  Extra,  "  allude  to,  and  speak  of" 
Christian  immersion  as  the  "  remission  of  sins." 
Now,  according  to  the  Bethany  Reformation,  im- 
mersion is  not  the  "  remission  of  sins,"  but  the 
means  of  obtaining  it.  Which  is  right,  the  Apos- 
tolic Fathers,  or  the  father  of  the  "  current 
Reformation  ?" 

I  deem  these  Fathers  of  very  little  importance  in 
the  controversy.  That  they  early  attached  an 
undue  importance  to  Christian  ordinances  is  very 
clear      That  they  called  baptism  "  regeneration," 


278  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PEINCIPLES. 

confounding  the  symbol  with  the  thing  symbolized, 
and  ascribed  to  the  act  a  sin-cleansing  efficacy,  is 
quite  as  evident,  and  entitled  to  as  much  consider- 
ation, as  that  they  employed  in  regard  to  the 
eucharist  strong  language  which  is  confidently  cited 
by  the  Papists  in  support  of  the  dogma  of  transub- 
Btantiation.  If  Mr.  Campbell  can  prove  the  iden- 
tity of  baptism  and  regeneration,  if  he  can  establish 
the  doctrine  of  baptismal  remission  by  the  authority 
of  the  Fathers,  the  Eomanists  can  by  testimonies 
equally  clear,  pointed,  and  unexceptionable,  support 
the  doctrine  of  the  real  presence  in  the  mass.  That 
the  early  converts  to  Christianity  from  heathenism 
should  have  had  a  strong  tendency  to  attach  an  ex- 
cessive and  superstitious  importance  to  the  cere- 
monials of  religion,  will  surprise  no  one  who  carefully 
considers  the  character  of  their  idolatrous  training, 
and  the  natural  bias  of  imperfectly  educated  minds. 
To  this  tendency,  and  the  seemingly  trivial  mistakes 
that  early  sprang  from  it,  we  trace  that  stream  of 
superstition, .  error  and  impiety,  which  has  so  long 
overflowed  and  desolated  the  larger  portion  of  the 
so-called  Christian  world.  We  should  be  careful 
how  we  follow  a  leader,  who,  to  overwhelm  the  op- 
posers  of  a  favorite  theory,  would  open  afresh  this 
copious  fountain  of  pollution  and  mischief. 

Mr.  Campbell's  twelfth  and  last  proposition  in 
support  of  baptismal  remission,  maintains  that 
"  the  reformed  creeds,  Episcopilian,  Presbyterian, 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRIN /IPLES.  279 

Metliodist  and  Baptist,  siihstantially  avow  the  same 
views  of  immersion,  (as  those  developed  in  the 
Extra,)  tliough  apparently  afraid  to  carry  them  out 
in  practice."     Chn'ty  Eestored,  p.  231. 

I  will  leave  the  other  denominations  to  vindicate 
their  own  creeds,  if  they  deem  it  proper  to  do  so. 
Some  of  them  employ  language  on  the  subject  of 
baptism  which  I  do  not  approve,  any  more  than  I 
do  that  of  Mr.  Campbell  on  the  same  subject.  But 
on  behalf  of  the  Baptists,  I  affirm  that  they  have 
never  taught,  and  never  held  any  views  substantially 
agreeing,  or  that  could  by  any  ingenuity  be  tortured 
into  an  agreement  with,  Mr.  Campbell's  notions  on 
the  identity  of  immersion  and  regeneration,  and  on 
the  remission  of  sins  in  the  very  instant  of  being 
put  under  water.  The  assertion  is  a  gross  misrepre- 
sentation of  the  Baptist  denomination  and  of  every 
member  of  it  ;  and  Mr.  Campbell  himself  furnishes 
the  proof  of  this  misrepresentation.  He  quotes  tho 
Baptist  creed  as  follows — 

"  Chap.  XXX.  Section  1.  Baptism  is  an  ordi- 
nance of  the  New  Testament,  ordained  by  Jesus 
Christ,  to  be  unto  the  party  baptized  a  sign  of  his 
fellowship  with  him  in  his  death  and  resurrection  ; 
and  of  his  being  engrafted  into  him  ;  of  remission 
of  sins,  and  of  his  giving  up  himself  unto  God, 
through  Jesus  Christ,  to  live  and  walk  in  newness 
of  life."     Chn'ty  Restored,  p.  234. 

The  Baptists  have  always  maintained  that  bap  ■ 


280  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PKINCIPLES. 

tism  is  a  sign  of  the  remission  of  sins  ;  nor  have 
they  been  ashamed,  as  Mr.  Campbell  insinuates,  to 
carry  out  this  view,  so  far  as  it  could  be,  in  practice. 
But  is  it  possible  that  Mr.  Campbell  can  think  that 
the  teaching  of  the  Baptist  creed  is  '^  substantially" 
the  same  as  his  theory  of  baptismal  remission  ?  If 
so,  he  is  the  most  unfortunate  writer  that  has  ever 
put  pen  to  paper.  We  might  as  well  endeavor  to 
understand  the  ravings  of  a  bedlamite  as  the  stereo- 
typed writings  of  the  Bethany  Keformer.  But  let 
us  read  his  remarks  on  the  creed — 

"  The  Baptist  follows  the  Presbyterian  church  as 
servilely  as  the  Methodist  church  follows  the  English 
hierarchy."  We  are  willing  to  follow  the  Presby- 
terians, so  far  as  they  follow  the  Bible  ;  and  if  this 
be  servility,  it  were  a  pity  but  that  the  Reformer 
had  possessed  a  good  measure  of  it.  It  might  have 
saved  him  from  many  profitless  speculations,  un- 
seemly contradictions,  and  pernicious  errors,  and 
the  world  from  a  "  Beformation,"  which,  to  speak 
charitably,  has  been  of  very  questionable  benefit. 
But  let  us  hear  more  of  the  commentary.  "  But 
she  (the  Baptist  church)  avows  her  faith  that  im- 
mersion is  a  sign  of  remission."  And  then,  as  if  to 
obscure  the  subject,  he  continues — "  A  sign  of  the 
past,  the  present,  or  the  future  !  A  sign  accom- 
panying V  Now,  he  knew  perfectly  that  the  Bap- 
tists, without  a  dissentient,  understood  baptism  to 
be  a  sign,  as  the  terms  of  their  creed  plainly  import. 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   PUrNCIPLES.  281 

of  the  remission  of  sins  already  received  and  enjoyed 
by  faith  in  Christ;  but  whether  it  be  "a  sign  of 
the  past,  the  present,  or  the  future,"  it  differs  as 
widely  fi'om  Mr.  Campbell's  notions  of  the  identity 
of  immersion  and  regeneration,  and  of  remission 
through  the  act  of  immersion,  as  the  Lord's  Sup- 
per of  the  New  Testament  differs  from  the  Papal 
Mass. 

WEEKLY    COMMUNION. 

One  article  of  the  Bethany  Reformation  is,  that 
all  the  churches  of  Christ  are  required  to  commune 
at  the  Lord's  table  every  Lord's-day.  Mr.  Camp- 
bell's views  on  this  subject  are  expressed  in  the  fol- 
lowing condensed  proposition,  in  his  Millennial  Har- 
binger Extra,  No.  II,  p.  69. 

"  jT/ie  breaking  of  the  one  loaf,  and  the  joint  par- 
ticipation of  the  Lord,  in  commemoration  of  the 
Lord's  death,  usually  called  the  '  Lord's  Shipper,' 
is  an  instituted  part  of  the  ivorship  and  edification 
of  all  Christian  congregations  in  all  their  stated 
meetings." 

The  practice  of  weekly  communion  was  not  pecu- 
liar to  the  Eeformers.  It  jirevailed  among  several 
Christian  sects  in  Scotland,  where  Mr.  Campbell 
received  his  collegiate  education,  and  early  religious 
impressions.  It  was  not  seriously  opposed  among 
the  Baptists,  except  as  it  was  a  part  of  a  system, 
containing  many  objectionable  principles,  and  usu- 


282  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   PElNCIPl.ES. 

ally  advocated  as  the  harbinger  of  other  reforms,  or 
changes,  of  far  more  questionable  propriety. 

It  is  not  my  purpose  to  follow  the  circuitous  and 
prolix  train  of  propositions  and  arguments  by  which 
the  extra  aims  to  establish  the  divine  authority  of 
weekly  communion.  What  I  have  to  say  on  the 
subject  may  be  comprehended  in  a  few  plain  posi- 
tions, in  the  brief  discussion  of  which  the  most  im- 
portant of  these  arguments  will  be  noticed. 

1.  Weeldy  communion  is  not  commanded  in  the 
Scriptures,  either  by  Christ  or  his  apostles.  This 
point  is  conceded.  Every  commemorative  institu- 
tion, except  the  Lord's  Supper,  ordained  by  divine 
authority,  had  a  fixed  time  for  its  observance.  Mr. 
•Campbell  infers  from  analogy  that  the  Lord's  Sup- 
per— a  commemorative  institution — must  have  a 
stated  time  for  its  observance,  and  that  time  is  every 
Lord's-day.  Extra,  No.  II,  p.  73.  This  reasoning 
is  not  legitimate.  In  every  commemorative  rite, 
except  the  Lord's  Supper,  divinely  ordained,  the 
tim>e  of  its  observance  is  a  part  of  the  law  of  the  in- 
stitution. The  law  of  the  Passover  prescribes  defi- 
nitely the  time,  as  well  as  the  manner  of  keeping  it. 
But  the  Saviour  in  the  law  of  the  Lord's  Supper 
does  not  prescribe  the  times  of  its  observance,  bu 
uses  most  indefinite  language  on  the  subject. 
"  This  do  ye,  as  oft  as  ye  drink  it,  in  remembrance 
of  me.  For  as  oftei2  as  ye  eat  this  bread,  and  drink 
this  cup,  ye  do  show  the  Lord's  death  till  he  come." 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   PRINCIPLES.  283 

1  Cor.  11 :  25-26.  Why  was  tLe  Lord's  Supper 
made  an  exception  to  this  rule  ?  Docs  not  a  differ- 
ence in  the  form  of  the  law  establishing  this  rite, 
imply  a  difference  in  the  rite  itself  ? 

The  Lord's  Supper  is  not,  however,  wholly  anom- 
alous. Fasting  and  prayer,  the  former,  at  least,  a 
positive  institution,  are  Christian  duties,  the  times 
of  whose  observance  are  not  divinely  prescribed,  but 
left  to  be  decided  by  the  circumstances  and  desires  of 
the  worshippers.  Why  may  not  the  Lord's  Supper 
belong  to  the  same  class  of  religious  duties  ? 

2.  It  does  not  clearly  appear  from  the  Scriptures 
that  weeldy  communion  was  practised  hy  any  of  the 
apostolic  churches. 

Three  passages  of  Scripture  are  chiefly  relied  on 
by  the  advocates  of  the  practice  for  its  support. 

The  first  text  is  Acts  2  :  42.  "  And  they  con- 
tinued steadfastly  in  the  apostles'  doctrine,  and  fel- 
lowship, and  in  breaking  of  bread,  (partaking  of  the 
Lord's  Supper,)  and  in  prayers."  From  this  lan- 
guage Mr.  Campbell  infers  that  the  first  Christian 
congregation,  which  met  in  Jerusalem,  "  did  as 
statedly  attend  upon  the  breaking  of  the  loaf  in  their 
public  meetings,  as  they  did  upon  any  other  part  of 
the  Christian  worship."  Mill.  Har.  Extra,  No.  II, 
1>.  69.  All  that  can  be  logically  deduced  from  this 
text  is,  that  "  breaking  of  bread"  was  a  part  of  the 
instituted  worship,  steadily  observed,  by  the  first 
Christian   church  ;  but    whether  it   was   observed 


284  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

daily,  weekly,  or  monthly,  before  or  after  prayer,  or 
more  or  less  frequently  than  prayer,  does  not  ap- 
pear. It  may  be  affirmed  of  a  church  that  com- 
munes monthly,  as  truly  as  of  one  that  communes 
weekly,  or  daily,  that  it  continues  steadfastly  "  in 
breaking  of  bread." 

The  second  passage  relied  on  in  support  of  the 
practice  is  Acts  20  :  7.  "  And  upon  the  first  day 
of  the  week  when  the  disciples  came  together  to 
break  bread"  &c.  From  this  passage  it  is  inferred 
that  it  was  the  custom  of  the  disciples  to  meet  on 
the  first  day  of  the  week,  and  that  the  primary 
object  of  their  meeting  was  to  break  bread.  The 
premises  do  not  justify  the  conclusion.  It  is  not 
logical  to  derive  a  general  conclusion  from  a  partic- 
ular fact.  The  fact  stated  in  the  text  is  particular. 
When  Paul,  the  founder  of  the  church,  was  in 
Troas,  the  disciples  came  together  to  break  bread. 
Suppose  it  had  been  a  special  appointment  for  com- 
munion, in  view  of  the  presence  of  the  distinguished 
apostle,  or  the  stated  monthly  communion  of  the 
church,  might  not  the  historian  have  said,  nay, 
would  he  not  have  been  compelled  to  say,  in  record- 
ing the  event,  "  On  the  first  day  of  the  week  lohen 
the  disciples  came  together  to  break  bread  ?"  On 
that  particular  day  the  disciples  in  Troas  came  to- 
gether to  break  bread,  but  whether  they  invariably 
came  together  on  the  first  day  of  the  week  for  the 
same  purpose  cannot  be  leam'^d  from  the  text,  or 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES.  285 

its  context.  All  that  can  be  fairly  affirmed  is  that 
the  text  is  in  harmony  with  weekly  communion,  and 
contributes,  with  other  testimonies,  to  show  the 
prohabiHty  of  its  prevalence  in  the  apostolic 
churches.     See  Mill,  Har.  Extra,  No.  2,  p.  70. 

Another  text  quoted  in  proof  of  weekly  commu- 
nion is  1  Cor.  11  :  20.  "When  ye  come  together 
therefore  into  one  place,  this  is  not  to  eat  the  Lord's 
Supper."  "To  act  thus,"  says  Mr.  Campbell,  "is 
unworthy  of  the  object  of  your  meeting.  To  act 
thus  is  not  -to  eat  the  Lord's  Supper.  It  is  not  to 
show  forth  the  Lord's  death.  Thereby  declaring 
that  this  is  the  chief  object  of  meeting."  Mill. 
Har.  Extra,  No.  2,  p.  72.  As  the  Corinthians  met 
weekly,  and  as  eating  the  Lord's  Supper  was  the 
chief  object  of  their  meeting,  it  is  inferred  that 
they  communed  weekly.  From  this  reasoning  I 
dissent.  The  Corinthian  church  sadly  profaned  the 
Lord's  supper.  They  changed  it  into  a  bacchana- 
lian feast,  perverting  it  from  its  true  design.  The 
apostle  reproved  them  for  their  impiety.  "  When 
ye  come  together  therefore  into  one  place,"  for  re- 
ceiving the  communion,  whether  daily,  weekly  or 
monthly,  "  this  is  not  to  eat  the  Lord's  Supper," 
but  to  desecrate  it.  Whether  they  came  together 
for  other  purposes  than  to  eat  the  Lord's  Supper  it 
was  not  the  design  of  Paul  to  consider.  Of  theii 
communion  seasons,  and  only  of  their  communion 
seasons,   does   ho  discourse  ;    and   when  they  as 


286  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

sembled  to  "  break  bread"  tliey  profaned  the  insti- 
tution. Of  this  text  I  must  say,  as  of  the  preced- 
ing, it  accords  with  the  practice  of  weekly  commu- 
nion, but  can  only  be  logically  urged  in  support  of 
the  prohahility  of  its  observance  in  the  primitive 
churches. 

3.  Some  of  the  arguments  used  in  support  of 
weekly,  may  with  equal  propriety  he  used  in  support 
of  daily  communion.  "  Spiritual  health  as  well  as 
corporeal  health,  is  dependent  on  food.  It  is 
requisite  for  corporeal  health  that  food  not  only  be 
salutary  in  its  nature,  and  sufficient  in  its  quantity, 
but  that  it  be  received  at  proper  intervals,  and 
these  regular  and  fixed.  Is  it  otherwise  with  moral 
health  ?"  So  reasons  the  Mill.  Ear.  Extra,  No.  2, 
p.  73.  The  writer  might,  quite  as  logically,  have 
carried  his  analogy  a  little  farther.  As  daily  food 
is  requisite  for  the  health  of  the  body,  so  daily 
communion  is  requisite  for  the  health  of  the  soul. 
Doctor  Doddridge  says — "  We  have  great  reason  to 
believe  that  the  eucharist  was  often  celebrated 
among  these  primitive  converts,  perhaps  much 
oftener  than  every  Lord's  day."  Note  on  Acts  2  : 
42.  It  would  seem  then  that  the  probable  practice 
of  the  first  Christian  church  concurs  with  the  logic 
of  the  Extra  to  lead  the  churches  back,  not  to 
weekly,  but  to  daily,  or  semi-weekly  communion. 

4.  Admitting  that  weeJcly  communion  was  observed 
hy  the  apostolic  churches,  d  :>es  it  follow  that  theprac- 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES.  287 

tice  is  obligatory  on  all  churches  ?  The  soundness 
of  this  conclusion  does  not  appear.  If  the  law  in- 
stituting the  Lord's  Supper,  has  left  the  times  of 
its  observance  to  be  decided  by  the  discretion  of  the 
churches,  then  the  practice  of  the  early  churches, 
in  the  exercise  of  this  discretion,  is  not  obligatory 
on  other  churches.  Let  me  illustrate  this  point  by 
a  similar  case.  The  duty  of  Christians  to  contribute 
of  their  worldly  substance  for  the  support  and 
spread  of  the  Gospel  is  plainly  revealed  in  the  Scrip- 
tures ;  but  the  measure  and  manner  of  the  contri- 
bution are  to  be  determined  by  them  in  view  of  their 
resources,  circumstances,  and  the  exigency  of  the 
Redeemer's  cause.  Now,  the  first  Christian  church 
in  Jerusalem  "  sold  their  possessions  and  their 
goods,"  "  and  had  all  things  common."  The  law 
of  Christ  required  that  they  should  contribute,  and 
they  in  their  discretion  and  liberality  contributed 
all  they  possessed.  But  is  their  example  obligatory 
on  churches  in  the  present  day  ?  The  advocates 
of  weekly  communion  will  scarcely  maintain  the 
affirmative.  But  if  the  example  of  the  first  church, 
under  one  indefinite  law,  is  not  obligatory  on  other 
churches,  why  should  its  example  under  another 
law,  equally  indefinite,  be  obligatory? 

5.  Conceding,  as  Mr.  Campbell  maintains,  that 
the  Lord's  Supper  "  is  an  instituted  part  of  the  wor- 
ship and  edification  of  all  Christian  congregations 
in  all  their  stated  meetings"  it  is  grievously  neg- 


288  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   PRINCIPLES. 

lected  not  only  by  the  religious  sects  generally,  hut 
hy  the,  churches  of  the  current  Beforraation.  These 
churches  meet,  particularly  those  in  cities,  twice 
every  Lord's  day,  once  on  some  week-day  evening, 
and  sometimes  for  many  days  and  nights  consecu- 
tively, and  yet  they  break  bread  only  once  a  week. , 
If  the  Lord's  Supper  is  an  instituted  part  of  the 
worship  of  all  Christian  churches  in  all  their  stated 
meetings,  by  what  authority,  in  heaven  or  on  earth, 
do  the  Reformed  churches  assemble,  statedly  and  re- 
peatedly, without  breaking  the  loaf.?  If  their 
principles  are  correct,  they  need  another  and  an 
important  reformation. 

6.  There  is  no  ohjection  to  weekly  communion, 
provided  it  is  not  imposed  on  the  churches  as  a  term 
of  communion.  The  practise  is  not  binding  on  the 
churches.  But  it  is  admitted  that  among  the 
early  churches,  it  is  highly  probable,  that  it  did 
generally,  if  it  did  not  universally  prevail.  I  do  not 
perceive  any  solid  objection  against  returning  to  the 
practice.  It  may  be  well  for  the  churches  seriously 
and  candidly  to  inquire,  whether  a  more  frequent 
celebration  of  the  Lord's  Supper — a  rite  so  preg- 
nant with  instruction,  and  so  eminently  impressive — 
would  not  contribute  to  increase  their  piety  and 
usefulness. 

I  cannot,  perhaps,  more  appropriately,  than  at 
this  point,  introduce  a  few  remarks  on  Mr.  Camp- 
bell's views  of  what  is  usually  termed  "  Close  Com- 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    PRINCIPLES.  289 

munion,"  No  man  was  ever  more  clearly  sliut  up 
by  his  principles  to  the  necessity  of  insisting  on  re- 
stricted communion,  than  Mr.  Campbell.  Main- 
taining, as  he  does,  that  without  immersion,  there 
is  neither  regeneration,  conversion,  nor  the  remis- 
sion of  sins,  he  cannot,  without  gross  inconsistency, 
receive  the  unbaptized  to  the  Lord's  table.  Surely, 
those  who  are  not  "  pardoned,  justified,  sanctified, 
reconciled,  adopted  and  saved,"  as  according  to  Mr. 
Campbell's  theory,  all  unimmersed  persons  are  not, 
are  without  Scriptural  qualifications  for  communing 
at  the  Lord's  table.  The  legitimate  consequence 
of  his  principles  he  has  very  fully  admitted. 

In  the  year  1835,  Mr.  Campbell  had  a  corres- 
pondence with  William  Jones,  a  distinguished 
Baptist  mini'jler  of  London.  Mr.  Jones  proposed 
the  following  r^uestion.  "  Do  any  of  you?'  churches 
admit  U7iba2yf  Ized  persons  to  communion  ;  a  prac- 
tice that  is  lecoming  very  prevalent  in  this  country  ?" 

To  this  query  Mr.  Campbell  replied — "  Not  one, 
as  far  as  Vr.own  to  me.  I  am  at  a  loss  to  understand 
on  whit  principles — by  what  law,  precedent,  or 
license^  any  congregation  founded  upon  the  Apostles 
and  Prophets,  Jesus  Christ  being  the  chief  corner- 
stone, could  dispense  with  the  practice  of  the  Prim- 
•tive  church — with  the  commandment  of  the  Lord, 
and  the  authority  of  his  Apostles.  Does  not  this 
look  like  making  void  the  word  or  commandment  of 
Goil,  by  human  tradition  ?     I  know  not  how  I  could 


290  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    PllINCIPLjSS. 

exhort  one  professor  to  '  arise  and  be  baptized/  as 
Ananias  commanded  Saul,  and  at  the  same  time 
receive  another  into  the  congregation  without  it. 
Nay,  why  not  dispense  with  it  altogether,  and  be 
consistent  ?"     Mill.  Har.,  vol.  6,  p.  18. 

In  1843,  in  his  debate  with  Rev.  N.  L.  Rice,  Mr. 
Campbell,  to  prove  the  liberality  of  the  Reformers, 
spoke  thus — "  We,  indeed,  receive  to  our  commu- 
nion persons  of  other  denominations,  who  will  take 
upon  them  the  responsibility  of  their  participating 
with  us.  We  do,  indeed,  in  our  affections,  and  in 
our  practice,  receive  all  Christians,  all  who  give  evi- 
dence of  tljeir  faith  in  the  Messiah,  and  of  their 
attachment  to  his  person,  character,  and  will." 
Deb.  with  Rice,  p.  785. 

Mr.  Campbell,  in  his  debate  with  Rice,  labored 
to  show  the  perfect  agreement  of  the  above  extracts  ; 
but  labored  unsuccessfully.  If  the  passages  are  not 
contradictory,  it  will  be  hard  to  find  a  contradiction 
in  the  English  language.  To  Mr.  Jones  he  says. 
We  admit  no  unhaptized  person  to  communion — 
there  is  neither  "law,  precedent,  nor  license"  for  it. 
To  Mr.  Rice,  he  says,  "  We  receive  to  our  commu- 
nion 'persons  of  other  denominations/'  unhaptized 
persons,  "  who  will  take  upon  them  the  responsi- 
bility of  participating  with  us."  . 

Every  man  has  a  right  to  change  his  opinions  ; 
and  for  an  honest  and  frank  aVowal  of  the  change 
he  deserves  no  censure.     Eveiy  man  has  a  perfect 


•    CAMPBELLISM    \N    ITS    PRINCIPLES.  291 

riglit  to  explain  the  terms  in  which  he  expresses  his 
opinions.  But  when,  from  inadvertence,  obscurity 
of  thought,  or  incorrectness  of  diction,  he  perpe- 
trates a  plain  and  palpable  contradiction,  he  owes 
it  to  himself,  to  fairness,  and  to  truth  to  acknow- 
ledge and  correct  the  error. 


CAMPBELLISM  IN   ITS   DISCIPLINE. 

One  of  the  avowed  objects,  as  has  already  been 
stated,  of  Mr.  Campbell's  Keformation  was  the 
union  of  all  Christians  on  the  apostolic  foundation. 
Of  the  desirableness  of  the  object  there  is  no  differ- 
ence of  opinion  among  the  intelligent  friends  of  the 
Kedeemer.  It  is  an  end  devoutly  wished  and 
prayed  for  by  all  who  love  Jesus  Christ  in  sincerity 
The  union  so  worthy  to  be  sought  by  Christians,  is 
not,  however,  a  mere  ecclesiastical  union,  cemented 
by  worldly  policy,  and  maintained  by  the  ignorance, 
apathy  and  subservience  of  the  laity,  and  the 
ghostly  intolerance  of  the  clergy  ;  nor  a  mere  nom- 
inal unity,  in  which  men  of  all  principles  and  all 
practices  are  held  together  by  the  utterance  of  a 
common  "  STiibholeth  f  but  a  unity  in  faith  and 
knowledge,  cemented  by  love,  and  resulting  in  har- 
monious, cordial  and  effective  exertions  for  the  pro- 
motion of  the  Kedeemer's  kingdom. 

What  is"  the  proper  foundation  of  Christian 
Union  ?  This  is  a  very  important  question — a 
question  which  is  clearly  answered  in  the  Scriptures 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   DISCIPLINE,  293 

This  foundation  is  "  the  truth" — that  system  of 
divine  truth  styled  in  the  New  Testament  "  the 
Gospel,"  "  the  faith,"  "  the  doctrine  of  Christ," 
&c.  This  truthj'not  merely  as  it  is  recorded  in  the 
Scriptures,  but  as  it  is  understood,  believed,  loved 
and  obeyed,  becomes  a  bond  of  union  among  Chris- 
tians. When  Christ  ascended  up  on  high,  "he 
gave  some,  apostles ;  and  some,  prophets  ;  and 
some,  evangelists  ;  and  some,  pastors  and  teachers ; 
for  the  perfecting  of  the  saints,  for  the  work  of  the 
ministry,  for  the  edifying  of  the  body  of  Christ : 
Till  we  all  come  to  the  unity  of  the  faith,  and  of  the 
Tcnoioledge  of  the  Son  of  God,  unto  a  perfect  man," 
&c.  Eph.  4  :  8-14.  The  ascended  Redeemer  be- 
stowed on  his  saints  supernaturally  qualified  in- 
structors, to  secure  their  unity  in  "  the  faith,"  the 
"  one  faith"  mentioned  v.  5 — the  system  of  evan- 
gelical truth — and  "  the  knowledge  of  the  Son  of 
God," — of  his  person,  character,  work  and  oflSces — 
whom  to  know  is  life  eternal.  And  one  end  which 
Christ  proposed  to  secure  by  this  enlightened  union 
of  the  saints  is  their  steadfast  adherence  to  the 
truth.  *'  That  we  henceforth  be  no  more  children, 
tossed  to  and  fro,  and  carried  about  with  every  wind 
of  doctrine,  by  the  sleight  of  men,  and  cunning 
craftiness,  whereby  they  lie  in  wait  to  deceive  ;" 
<fcc.,  verses  14-15.  Christians  are  exhorted  in  the 
Scriptures  to  "  continue  in  the  faith  grounded  and 
settled,"  Col.  1:    23  ;  to  strive  "  together  for  the 


294  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   DISCIPLINE. 

faith  of  the  Gospel,"  Phil.  1  :  27  ;  and  "  earnestly 
to  contend  for  the  faith  once  delivered  to  the  saints." 
Jude  3.  They  are  said  to  have  "fellowship  in  the 
Gospel,"  Phil.  1  :  5.  Christians  love  one  another 
in  the  truth.  "  The  elder  unto  the  elect  lady  and 
her  children,  whom  I  love  in  the  truth  ;  and  not  I 
only,  but  also  all  they  that  have  known  the  truth  ; 
for  the  truth's  sake,  which  dwelleth  in  us,  and  shall 
be  with  us  forever  "  2  John,  verses  1-2.  If  Chris- 
tians "  walk  in  the  light,"  that  is,  in  the  knowledge 
of  the  truth,  they  "  have  fellowship  one  with  an- 
other." 1  John  1  :  7.  They  are  required  to  reject 
from  their  fellowship  all  who  do  not  bring  the  "  doc- 
trine of  Christ."  "  He  that  abideth  in  the  doc- 
trine of  Christ,  he  hath  both  the  Father  and  the 
Son.  If  there  come  any  unto  you,  and  bring  not 
this  doctrine,  'receive  him  not  into  your  house, 
neither  bid  him  God  speed,"  2  John,  v.  10.  The 
church  in  Pergamos  were  sharply  reproved  because 
they  retained  in  their  fellowship  some  who  held  the 
"  doctrine  of  Balaam,"  and  also  some  who  held 
"  the  doctrine  of  the  Nicolaitanes,"  which  Christ 
hated.  Eev.  2  :  14-15.  From  these  Scriptures  it 
is  manifest  that  divine  truth,  or  the  Gospel,  as  it  is 
believed,  understood  and  loved,  is  the  basis  of  Chris- 
tian union.  The  saints  love  one  another  in  the 
truth,  and  for  the  truth — in  obeying  the  truth  they 
have  fellowship  one  with  another — they  are  required 
to  hold  fast  the  truth,  to  contend  earnestly  for  it, 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   DISCI  PI  INE.  295 

and  to  reject  from  their  communion  th  )se  who  do 
not  embrace  it.  Any  union  which  is  not  founded 
on  the  knowledge  and  love  of  Divine  truth  is  a 
union  of  ignorance,  interest,  policy  or  coercion  ;  hut 
not  the  union  for  which  Christ  prayed,  and  for 
wHch  his  people  should  lahor. 

It  is  by  no  means  easy  to  define  the  measure  of 
Ignorance  and  unbelief  compatible  with  the  exist- 
ence of  genuine  piety,  and  sincere  Christian  fellow- 
ship. There  are,  however,  certain  facts,  doctrines 
and  duties,  fundamental  to  the  Christian  system  ; 
and  the  willful  rejection  of  these,  or  any  one  of  them, 
from  whatever  obliquity  of  intellect  or  of  heart,  pre- 
cludes the  possibility  of  enlightened.  Scriptural, 
Christian  union.  The  Gospel  assumes  the  exist- 
ence, and  moral  government  of  God — the  depravity 
and  guilt  of  man — and  to  deny  either  of  these  truths 
is  to  subvert  the  foundation  of  Christianity.  The 
Gospel  reveals  the  Divinity  of  Christ,  the  expiatory 
nature  of  his  sufferings  and  death,  his  resurrection 
from  the  dead,  and  his  investiture  with  regal  author- 
ity at  the  right  hand  of  the  Father  ;  and  he  that 
rejects  either  of  these  truths,  rejects  the  Gospel 
itself.  Kepentance,  faith,  and  a  holy  life,  are 
plainly  inculcated  on  men  in  the  Gospel ;  and  ho 
that  denies  their  necessity,  perverts  and  destroys  the 
system.  The  Gospel  teaches  a  future  state  of  re- 
wards and  punishments,  from  which  it  derives  its 
strongest  motives  to  piety  ;  and  *he  that  denies  or 


296  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITJ    DISC.PLINE, 

perverts  this  doctrine  makes  war  upon,  if  he  does 
not  overthrow  "  the  faith."  It  is  not  my  purpose 
to  furnish  a  summary  of  Christian  doctrine,  hut  only 
to  point  out  some  of  tho  principles  which  are  essen- 
tial to  the  system,  and  the  knowledge  and  admission 
of  which  arc  indispensable  to  the  Scriptural  union 
of  Christians.  I  do  not  affirm  that  a  perfect  knowl- 
edge of  all  these  principles  is  essential  to  Christian 
fellowship  ;  but  I  do  most  earnestly  maintain  that 
the  persistent  rejection  of  any  one  of  them,  under 
whatever  plausible  pretence,  and  with  whatever 
show  of  argument,  precludes  the  possibihty  of  "fel- 
lowship in  the  Gospel."  Fellowship,  indeed,  there 
may  be,  but  it  is  the  fellowship  of  error,  pseudo 
charity,  and  worldly  policy — a  fellowship  founded 
on  a  principle,  which  bids  "  God-speed"  to  him 
that  brings  not  "  the  doctrine  of  Christ,"  and  which 
retains  in  communion  "  them  which  hold  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Nicolaitanes,"  that  Christ  hates. 

On  the  subject  of  Christian  Union,  Mr.  Campbell 
has  written  many  things  which  deserve  considera- 
tion. It  is  my  purpose,  however,  to  restrict  my 
remarks  at  present,  to  the  foundation  on  which  he 
proposes  to  establish  this  union.  It  is  laid  down 
in  his  Christianity  Restored,  pp.  118,  119. 

"  But  the  grandeur,  sublimity,  and  beauty  of  the 
foundation  of  hope,  and  of  ecclesiastical  or  social 
union,  established  by  the  author  and  founder  of 
Christianity,  consisted  in  this,  that  the  belief  of 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   DISCIPLINE,  297 

ONE  FACT,  and  that  upon  the  best  evidence  in  the 
world,  is'  all  that  is  requisite,  as  far  as  faith  goes, 
to  salvation.  The  belief  of  this  one  fact,  and 
submission  to  one  institution,  expressive  of  it,  is 
all  that  is  required  of  heaven  to  admission  into  the 
church.  A  Christian,  as  defined,  not  by  Dr.  Jolin- 
son,  nor  any  creed-maker,  but  by  one  taught  from 
heaven.  Is  one  that  believes  this  one  fact,  and  has 
submitted  to  one  institution,  and  whose  deportment 
accords  with  the  morality  and  virtue  of  the  great 
Prophet.  The  one  fact  is  expressed  in  a  single  pro- 
position, iAai  Jesus,  the  Nazarene,  is  the  Messiah. 
The  evidence  upon  which  it  is  to  be  believed,  is 
the  testimqpy  of  twelve  men,  confirmed  by  prophecy, 
miracles,  and  spiritual  gifts.  The  one  institution  is 
baptism  into  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the 
Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit." 

The  reader  has  now  a  full  view  of  the  platform, 
established,  not  by  "the  author  and  founder  of 
Christianity,"  but  by  Mr.  Alexander  Campbell  of 
Bethany,  Virginia,  for  the  joyful  union  of  all  the 
sects  and  parties  in  Christendom.  Before  we  ven- 
ture upon  it,  however,  we  must  subject  it  to  a  care- 
ful examination. 

"  The  belief  of  one  fact,"  and  "  submission  to  one 
institution,"  constitute  "  the  foundation  of  hope, 
and  of  ecclesia3tical,  or  social  union."  So  teaches 
Mr.  Campbell. 

"  With  us,"  these  are  his  words  "  Revelation  has 


298  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   DISCIPLINE. 

nothing  to  do  with  opinions,  or  aljstract  reason,  ngs;  for 
it  is  founded  wholly  and  entirely  upon  facts."  Chn'ty 
Restored,  p.  106  "All  revealed  religion  is  based  upon 
facta."  p.  113.  I  should  suppose  that  Mr.  Campbell 
uses  the  term  "fact"  in  its  secondary  sense,  as  equiva- 
lent to  "  truth,"  if  his  own  definition  did  not  preclude 
that  supposition.  "  Fact,"  he  says,  "means  something 
done.  That  God  exists  is  a  truth,  but  not  a  fact ; 
that  he  created  the  heavens  and  the  earth  is  a  fact 
and  a  truth."  pp.  106,  107.  I  approve  the  defi- 
nition. That  facts  occupy  an  important  place  in 
the  evangelic  economy  must  be  conceded  ;  but  that 
the  truths  connected  with  them,  and  from  which 
they  derive  their  significance,  are  less  important, 
must  be  denied.  That  God  exists  is  a  truth  which 
lies  at  the  foundation  of  all  genuine  religion,  natural 
and  revealed.  "For  he  that  cometh  to  God  must 
believe  that  he  is,  and  that  he  is  a  rewarder  of  them 
that  diligently  seek  him."  Heb.  11  :  6.  That  Jesus 
is  the  Son  of  God  is  a  truth — that  he  wrought  mir- 
acles is  a  fact  ;  that  he  was  put  to  death  by  Pon- 
tius Pilate,  is  a  fact — that  he  died  for  our  sins  is  a 
truth ;  that  he  rose  from  the  dead,  is  a  fact — 
that  he  rose  "  for  our  justification,"  is  a  truth  ; 
that  he  ascended  up  to  heaven,  is  a  fact — that 
he  ever  lives  "  to  make  intercession  for  us,"  is 
a  truth  ;  and  it  will  scarcely  be  maintained  that 
these  facts  are  more  important  than  the  truths  con- 
nected with  them.     Indeed,  the  Gospel  facts,  won- 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS   DISCIPK  NE.  299 

derful  as  they  are,  possess  no  value  apart  from  the 
doctrine  or  truth,  in  which  they  had  their  origin, 
and  by  which  their  nature  and  uses  are  explained. 
The  death  of  Jesus  would  be  of  no  greater  conse- 
quence to  the  world,  than-  that  of  the  two  thieves 
who  were  crucified  with  him,  were  it  not  that  the 
event  is  a  part  of  a  great  system  of  truths,  facts  and 
duties,  extending  backwards  to  the  creation  of  the 
world,  and  forwards  through  the  ages  of  eternity. 
From  the  proposition,  then,  that  "  all  revealed  reli- 
gion is  based  on  facts,"  I  must  beg  leave  to  dissent. 
But  Mr.  Campbell  goes  farther  still.  He  narrows 
greatly  the  ground  which  he  at  first  occupied.  He 
sets  aside  all  facts,  as  fundamental  in  religion,  ex- 
cept one.  "  The  belief  of  one  fact — is  all  that  is  re- 
quisite, so  far  as  faith  goes,  to  salvation."  "  This 
one  fact,"  we  are  told,  "  is  expressed  in  a  single 
proposition — that  Jesus  the  Nazarene  is  the  Messiah. 
Now,  according  to  Mr.  Campbell's  own  definition, 
this  proposition  is  clearly  not  a  fact,  but  a  truth. 
It  is  expressive  not  of  something  done,  but  of  some- 
thing that  exists.  In  a  note,  Mr.  Campbell  writes 
— "  The  fundamental  proposition  is — that  Jesus  is 
the  Christ.  The  fact,  however,  contained  in  this 
proposition  is — that  God  has  anointed  Jesus  of 
Nazareth  as  the  only  Saviour  of  sinners."  p.  118. 
Now,  I  deny  that  the  fact,  as  he  terms  it,  is  con- 
tained in  the  proposition.  To  affirm,  as  Mr.  Camp- 
bell does,  that  the  simple  proposition,  "  that  Jesua 


300  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS   DISCIPLINE. 

is  the  Christ,"  contains  the  fact,  "  that  God  anointed. 
Jesus  of  Nazareth,  the  only  Saviour  of  sinners,"  is 
to  evince  a  strange  obscurity  of  perception,  or  to 
presume  very  far  on  the  credulity  of  his  readers. 
And  even  if  it  were  admitted,  contrary  to  Mr.  Camp- 
bell's own  definition,  that  the  proposition  is  expres- 
sive of  fact  rather  than  truth,  why  does  he  affirm 
that  it  expresses  one  fact,  when  it  manifestly  ex- 
presses two  ?  That  Jesus  is  the  Nazarene,  is  one 
fact ;  and  that  this  Nazarene  is  the  Christ,  is  another, 
and  totally  different  fact.  "  The  evidence,"  Mr, 
Campbell  continues,  "  upon  which  it  (tha  '  fact,' 
or,  more  properly  the  truth)  is  to  be  believed  is  the 
testimony  of  twelve  men,  confirmed  by  prophecy, 
miracles,  and  spiritual  gifts."  But  why  does  he 
say  on  the  testimony  of  twelve  men  ?  The  apostles 
were  divinely  appointed,  and  important,  but  not 
the  only  oral  witnesses  of  this  truth.  But  we  must 
believe  it,  if  we  believe  it  at  all,  not  on  oral  but 
written  testimony  ;  and  in  the  New  Testament  we 
have  but  eight  witnesses,  three  of  whom  did  not  be- 
long to  the  "  twelve  men,"  the  apostles.  Thus 
loosely  did  this  Keformer  write  on  subjects  funda- 
mental in  his  system,  and  demanding  the  greatest 
clearness  of  thought,  and  accuracy  of  expression. 

"  Jesus  the  Nazarene  is  the  Messiah"  This  is 
an  important  proposition.  But  by  what  authority 
does  Mr.  Campbell  make  the  belief  of  it  "  the  foun- 
dation" of  "  ecclesiastical  or  social  union  ?"     There 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   DISCIPLINE.  301 

aie  other  propositions  contained  in  the  Sciiptures, 
expressing  both  facta  and  truths,  equally  funda- 
mental in  the  evangelic  system,  and  the  belief  of 
which   is   equally   necessary   to    salvation.      That 
"  Christ  died  for  our  sins,"  along  with  other  im- 
portant focts,  is  declared  by  Paul  to  be  the  Gospel 
which  he  preached  to  the  Corinthians,  and  by  which 
they  were  to  be  saved,  if  they  would  keep  it  "in 
memory."     1  Cor.  15  :  1-3.     It  is  throngh  faith  in 
the  blood  of  Christ,  that  God  declares  "  his  right- 
eousness for  the  remission  of  sins  that  are  past/' 
Kom.  3  :  25.  /  That  Hesus  roseTfrom  the  dead  is  a  \ 
fact  of  primary  importance  in  the  Christian  system,     \ 
and  the  belief  of  it  is  requisite  to  salvation.     "If     j 
thou  shalt  confess  with  thy  mouth  the  Lord  Jesus,     \ 
and   shalt  believe  in   thine    heart  that  God   hath      \ 
raised  him  from  the  dead,  thou  shalt  be  saved."       \ 
Rom.  10 :  9.     The  "one  fact,"  which  is  not  a  fact,       \ 
seems  to  have  been  arbitrarily  selected,  by  the  Re-        I 
former,  from  many  facts  and  truths  equally  impor-        j 
tant,  and  made  the  basis  of  "  ecclesiastical  union."  \^v/ 

But,  we  must  examine  this  foundation  still  more 
carefully.     Does  Mr.  Campbell,  by  the  proposition  >. 
that  "  Jesus  the  Nazarene  is  the  Messiah,"  design     j 
to  include  those  truths  and  facts,  which  are  esscu-     f 
tially  connected  with  it,  and  which  constitute  the    j 
Gospel  ?     I  grant  that  a  sincere  and  an  intelligent  / 
belief  that  Jesus  is  the  Messiah,  supposes  a  belief/ 
in   the  whole  s}'8tora  of  which  this  truth  is  an  im-| 


302  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    DISCIPLINE. 

portant  part.  Salvation  is  promised  to  faith  in  the 
blood  of  Christ — in  the  resurrection  of  Christ — and 
in  the  Gospel  of  Christ,  as  well  as  to  the  belief  of 
the  "  one  fact"  that  "  Jesus  is  the  Messiah  ;"  and 
this  variety  of  language  is  accounted  for  by  the  sim- 
ple, and  well  understood  principle  that  the  belief 
of  one  fact  or  truth  is  used  to  denote  a  belief  in  the 
system  of  which  it  is  an  essential  part.  Now,  if  by 
the  belief  of  one  fact,  Mr.  Campbell  means  the  be- 
lief of  all  the  truths  and  facts  inseparably  connected 
with  it — in  fine,  the  Gospel  of  Christ^  have,  on 
^his  point,  no  controversy  with  him.  fBut,  then,  it 
follows  that  Mr.  Campbell  has  made  no  discovery 
on  this  subject — has  proposed  no  new  basis  of  eccle- 
siastical union.  It  is  precisely  that  for  which  evan- 
gelical Christians  have  always  contended.  They 
maintain  that  the  Gospel — the  system  of  truth  per- 
taining to  human  salvation — is  the  proper  founda- 
tion for  Christian  union ;  and  in  this  judgment  Mr. 
Cami)belljconcurs.  Whether,  in  this  aspect  of  the 
case,  he  can  be  vindicated  from  having  made  a  great 
ado  about  nothing,  and  having  written  very  vaguely 
and  obscurely  on  a  subject  which  called  for  clearness 
and  precision,  others  may  decide. 

It  can  hardly  be  supposed,  however,  that  the 
above  is  the  proper  interpretation  of  the  language 
under  discussion.  It  does  not  fairly  admit  of  this 
construction.  "  The  belief  of  one  fact — is  all 
TH^T  IS  REQUISITE,  OS  far  as  faith  goes,  to  salvation. 


GAMPBELLISM   I^    CTS   DISCIPLINE.  303 

If  a  man  believes  the  proposition,  styled  in  the 
Bethany  terminology  "  one  fact/'  "  that  Jesus  the 
Nazarcne  is  the  Messiah"  it  is  not  requisite  to  his 
salvation  that  he  should  believe  anything  else, 
whether  fact  or  truth,  in  the  universe.  This  is  his 
simple,  sole,  all-comprehending  creed,  ^^  I  believe 
that  Jesus  the  Nazarene  is  the  Messiah."  In  all  the 
creeds,  of  all  the  sects,  and  in  all  the  revelations  of 
God,  there  is  not  a  fact,  truth  or  principle  necessary 
to  be  believed  in  order  to  salvation,  except  this 
"  one  fact,"  which  is  to  be  believed  on  the  "  testi- 
mony of  twelve  men" 

On  this  subject  I  join  issue  with  Mr.  Campbell. 
I  cannot  admit  that  the  helief  of  one  fact  is  all  that 
is  requisite  J  as  far  as  faith  goes,  to  salvation. 

But  let  us  hear  the  arguments  in  support  of  the 
position  under  discussion.  "It  is  again  and  again 
asserted,"  says  the  writer,  "  in  the  clearest  lan- 
guage, by  the  Lord  himself,  the  apostles,  Peter, 
Paul  and  John,  that  he  that  believes  the  testimony 
that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  is  begotten  of  God,"  &c., 
p.  119.  By  this  process  of  reasoning  it  can  be 
pDved  with  equal  clearness,  that  the  proposition 
that  Jesus  is  the  Son  of  God,  or  that  Jesus  was 
raised  from  the  d^ad,  is  the  "  one  fact,"  or  truth, 
the  belief  of  which  "  is  all  that  is  requisite,  as  far 
as  faith  goes,  to  salvation  ;"  for  to  the  belief  of 
these  propositions  salvation  is  promised.  The  true 
principle  of  interpreting  these   passages  has  been 


304  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    DISCIPLINE. 

already  explained.  But  where,  permit  me  to  ask, 
is  it  stated,  or  intimated,  or  implied,  in  the  Scrip- 
tures, that  the  "  belief  of  one  fact,"  "  is  all  that 
is  requisite,  as  far  as  faith  goes  ?"  To  affirm  that 
"  whosoever  belie veth  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  is 
born  of  God,"  on  the  well  understood  principle, 
that  he  who  believes  that  truth,  also  believes  the 
facts  and  truths  essentially  connected  with  it,  is 
widely  different  from  affirming  that  the  belief  of 
one  fact  is  all  the  faith  requisite  to  salvation.  But 
hear  the  Reformer  again.  "  The  Saviour  expressly 
declared  to  Peter,  that  upon  this  fact,  that  he  was 
the  Messiah,  the  Son  of  God,  he  would  huild  his 
church."  p.  119. .  Now,  I  must  affirm  that  the 
Saviour  expressly  declared  no  such  thing.  Neither 
the  word  "  fact,"  nor  any  term  of  corresponding 
import  appears  in  the  passage  referred  to.  Mat. 
16  :  18.  The  text  is  one,  as  to  the  proper  inter- 
pretation of  which,  the  most  learned,  pious,  and 
distinguished  Biblical  critics  have  been  greatly 
divided  ;  and  to  assume  its  meaning,  and  to  employ 
that  assumed  meaning  in  support  of  a  doubtful 
proposition,  proves  nothing  so  much  as  the  paucity 
of  the  writer's  arguments.  But  let  us  listen  again. 
"  And  Paul  has  expressly  declared  that  '  other 
foundation  can  no  man  lay  (for  ecclesiastical  union) 
than  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ.'  "  I  do  not  re- 
member ever  to  have  met  with  a  more  glaring  per- 
version of  the  Word  of  God  than  this.     Paul  has 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   DISCIPLINE.  305 

expressly  declared  no  such  proposition.  The  pas- 
sage has  quotation  marks,  and  yet  no  such  passage 
is  found  in  all  the  writings  of  Paul.  The  garbled 
text  is  recorded,  1  Cor.  3  :  11.  It  reads  thus — 
"  Other  foundation  can  no  man  lay  than  that  is 
laid,  which  is  Jesus  Christ."  The  foundation,  ex- 
pressly declared  by  the  apostle  to  be  laid,  is,  not 
the  "  one  fact,"  as  the  passage  misquoted  by  Mr. 
Campbell  would  seem  to  import,  that  Jesus  is  the 
Christ,  but  Jesus  Christ,  himself.  This  apostolic 
declaration  is  in  perfect  harmony  with  other  por- 
tions of  Scripture.  See  Isaiah  28  :  16.  Eph.  2  : 
20.  And,  moreover,  for  Mr.  Campbell's  construc- 
tion of  the  passage  there  is  no  authority  in  the  com- 
mon version,  the  New  Translation,  published  by 
himself,  nor  the  Greek  text.  On  what  ground  he 
has  made  this  most  unwarrantable  change  in  the 
text,  I  know  not.  He  surely  ought  not  to  expect 
that  it  will  be  admitted  on  his  mere  declaration,  in 
opposition  to  the  plain  import  of  the  original,  and 
its  well  established  translation. 

In  consideration  of  the  flimsy  arguments  which 
have  been  noticed,  the  writer  proceeds  to  remark — 
"  The  point  is  proved  that  we  have  assumed  ;  and 
this  proved,  every  thing  is  established  requisite  to 
the  union  of  all  Christians  upon  a  proper  basis." 
pp.  119-120.  It  is  a  striking  peculiarity  of  Mr. 
Campbell's  controversial  writings  that  they  abound 
in  arguments  to  prove  what  nobody  denies,  and  take 


306  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   DISCIPLINE. 

for  granted,  or  furnish  very  slight  evidence  of  the 
main  points  at  issue.  Of  the  twenty-eight  pages 
devoted  to  the  discussion  of  the  Foundation  of 
Christian  Union,  not  more  than  a  page  is  occupied 
by  the  proofs,  such  as  they  are,  that  "  the  belief  of 
one  fact,  is  all  that  is  requisite,  so  far  as  faith  goes, 
to  salvation."  Whether  these  proofs  are  suflScient 
to  establish  the  point,  the  intelligent  reader  must 
judge. 

But  I  am  not  yet  done  with  this  foundation.  It 
is  quite  too  broad  and  comprehensive.  It  sustains, 
on  its  amj^le  surface,  not  only  all  Christians,  as 
defined  "  by  one  taught  from  heaven,"  but  errorists 
of  almost  every  class  and  grade.  Arians,  Socinians, 
Universalists,  Materialists,  Shakers,  Mormons,  to- 
gether with  many  who  are  ignorant  and  supersti- 
tious, profess  as  firmly  and  consistently,  as  Mr. 
Campbell,  himself  to  believe  that  Jesus  the  Nazarene 
is  the  Messiah.  They  put  their  own  interpretation 
on  the  language,  and  conform  their  religious  creed 
to  that  interpretation.  If  they  submit  to  the  "  one 
institution,"  and  their  "  deportment  accords  with 
the  morality  and  virtue  of  the  great  Prophet," 
they  are  in  the  judgment  of  the  Keformer,  Chris- 
tians, "  as  defined,  not  by  Dr.  Johnson,  nor  any 
creed-maker,  but  by  one  taught  from  heaven." 

Just  at  this    point  the  difference  between  the 
views  hold  by  the  Keformers,  and   "  Regulars,^'i||h 
clearly  revealed      We  maintain  that  the  belief  of 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS   DISCIPLINE,  307 

"  one  fact"  is  not  all  the  faith  that  is  requisite  to 
salvation  ;  but  that  saving  faith  embraces  the  whole 
system  of  facts,  truths,  and  duties,  essentially  con- 
nected with  this  "one  fact."  If,  then,  any  person 
professing  to  believe  that  Jesus,  the  Nazarene,  .is  the 
Messiah,  is  ignorant  of  the  import  of  the  proposi- 
tion, or  rejects  any  doctrine  or  fact,  vitally  connected 
^ith  it,  we  consider  it  prima-facie  evidence  that  he 
does  not  savingly  believe  the  "  one  fact."  He  that 
denies  the  doctrine  of  human  depravity  and  guilt — 
of  the  Divinity  of  Christ — of  the  vicarious  and  ex- 
piatory nature  of  his  sufferings — or  of  a  future  state 
of  rewards  and  punishments,  furnishes  decisive 
proof  that  he  does  not  savingly  believe  the  proposi- 
tion that  Jesus  is  the  Messiah  ;  or,  at  any  rate,  that 
he  does  not  bring  the  "  doctrine  of  Christ,"  and 
should  not  be  received  into  Christian  fellowship. 
Such  an  errorist,  whether  baptized  or  unbaptized, 
our  churches  would  promptly  refuse  to  receive,  and 
hold  in  fellowship.  To  do  otherwise,  would  be  to 
"  bid  him  God-speed,"  and  to  efface  the  distinction 
between  truth  and  error. 

But  the  creed  of  the  Keformation  has  but  one 
article,  viz,  :  /  believe  that  Jesus,  the  Nazarene,  is 
the  Messiah.  The  belief  of  this  proposition  "  is  aU 
that  is  requisite,  as  far  as  faith  goes,  to  salvation." 
He  that  believes  this  "  one  fact,"  and  submits  to 
"one  instituUoii  expressive  of  it,"  and  whose  morals 
are  correct,  is,  according   to   the   doctrine  of  the 


308  CAMPBELLISl    IS    ITS   DISCIPLIKE. 

Keformation,  "  a  Christian,"  fit  for  "  admission  into 
tke  church."'  He  is  not  required  to  believe  any 
other  fact  or  truth,  contained  within  the  whole  com- 
pass of  revelation.  He  may,  along  with  the  Kation- 
alists,  deny  the  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures  ;  he 
may,  in  company  with  the  Pelagians,  deny  the 
doctrine  of  man's  innate  depravity  ;  he  may,  in 
agreement  with  the  various  classes  of  Unitarians,^ 
pronounce  "  Jesus,  the  Nazarene,"  a  creature — a 
man — a  mere  man — a  fallible  man  ;  he  may  main- 
tain, as  do  the  Universalists,  there  is  no  punishment 
of  sin,  except  in  this  life  ;  he  may,  with  the  philo- 
sophic Priestley,  insist  that  the  soul  of  man  is 
material,  and  perishes  with  his  body  ;  he  may 
believe  that  Joe  Smith  was  a  prophet,  and  that  the 
Book  of  Mormon  is  a  new  revelation  from  God  ;  or 
he  may  be  deplorably  ignorant  of  the  first  principles 
of  Christianity  ;  but  according  to  the  fundamental 
doctrine  of  the  Keformation,  he  is  entitled  to  a 
place  in  the  church  of  Christ.  Let  there  be  no 
evasion  among  the  Reformers.  This  consequence  is 
fairly  and  logically  deduced  from  their  boasted 
creed.  And  startling  as  it  may  seem  to  be,  they 
may  well  be  reconciled  to  it,  as  it  establishes,  what 
else  it  might  be  difiicult  to  confirm,  their  claim  to 
unusual  liberality.  A  more  liberal  foundation  for 
the  union  of  all  Christians,  "  as  far  as  faith  goes," 
without  a  total  abandonment  of  evangelic  truth,  it 
would  be  difficult  for  human  ingenuity  to  devise. 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS    D  8CIPLINK  309 

But  this  boasted  foundation  is  as  inconsistent  with 
itself,  as  it  is  with  the  Scriptures.  It  contains  the 
elements  of  its  own  destruction.  He  who  believes 
"  one  fact,"  is  to  submit  to  "  one  institution  ex- 
pressive of  it."  Now,  is  a  man  to  be  baptized  with- 
out believing  that  Christ  has  commanded  believers 
to  be  baptized  ?  Why  then  is  he  to  be  baptized, 
and  upon  whose  authority  ?  But  if  he  is  to  be- 
lieve this,  then  something  more  is  requisite,  "  as 
far  as  faith  goes"  even  according  to  the  Bethany 
platform,  in  order  to  the  enjoyment  of  Christian 
Union. 

These  remarks  on  the  foundation  of  Christian 
Union,  might  have  been  introduced  with  equal  pro- 
priety under  the  head  of  Campbellism  in  its  organi- 
zation ;  but  as  I  desired  to  discuss  the  doctrine  in 
connexion  with  its  practical  results,  I  reserved  the 
discussion  for  this  place. 

I  now  propose  to  examine  the  actual  ivorking  of 
this  scheme  of  Christian  Union,  Experience  is  a 
great  teacher.  Time  tries  all  things.  Many  a  fine 
theory  has  vanished  at  the  touch  of  experiment. 
When  Mr.  Campbell's  chief  business  was  ftiult-find- 
ing,  he  had  an  easy,  if  not  a  grateful  task.  All 
churches,  sects  and  parties,  and  all  the  instructions 
and  labors  of  uninspired  men,  had  their  imperfec- 
tions ;  and  no  great  ability  or  research  was  required 
to  discover,  publish,  and  caricature  them.  Wo 
have  now  an  opportunity  of  learning  from  observa- 


310  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS    DISCIPLINE. 

tion,  in  a  measure,  the  fruits  of  the  Reformation. 
Mr.  Campbell  cannot  reasonably  object  that  churches 
built  upon  the  Apostolic  foundation,  of  "  belief  in 
one  fact,"  and  "  submission  to  one  institution/' 
modeled  after  the  "ancient  order  of  things,"  and 
commended  to  the  world  by  such  confident  and  lofty 
pretensions  of  superior  light,  purity,  and  freedom, 
should  be  scrutinized  with  a  careful  and  candid  eye. 
What  are  the  results  of  the  Discipline  adopted  by 
the  Reformers  ? 

It  is  discouraging  to  learn,  as  we  do  at  the  outset, 
"  that  the  theory  of  the  Reformation  is  far  in  ad- 
vance of  the  practice."  Mill,  Har.,  vol.  4,  p.  4.  We 
have  examined  the  theory,  somewhat  carefully,  and 
have  found  it  consistent  neither  with  itself,  nor 
the  Scriptures  ;  and  if  "  the  theory  is  far  in  advance 
of  the  practice"  the  practice  must  be  very  unsatis- 
factory. It  is  due,  however,  to  Mr,  Campbell  to 
observe,  that  his  depreciation  of  the  practice  of  the 
Reformation  in  comparison  with  its  theory,  was 
based  on  his  views  of  the  theory,  and  not  on  mine. 

It  has  been  shown  that  according  to  the  funda- 
mental principle  of  church  organization  maintained 
by  the  Reformers,  no  errorist,  of  correct  morals,  can 
be  excluded  from  the  church,  provided  he  professes 
to  believe  that  Jesus,  the  Nassarene,  is  the  Messiah, 
and  is  immersed  as  an  expression  of  this  belief.  I 
shall  now  proceed  to  show  that  the  grossest  errorists 
have  been,  knowingly  and  deliberately,  receiyed  and 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS    DISCIPLINE,  311 

retained  in  the  churches  o^the  so-called  Refor- 
mation. 

Of  the  withering  influence  of  Universalism  I  need 
say  nothing.  In  the  year  1828,  the  Rev.  Aylett 
Rains,  a  Universalist  preacher,  was  baptized,  in  the 
Western  Reserve,  Ohio,  for  the  remission  of  sins. 
In  the  same  year  he  appeared  at  the  Mahoning 
Association,  with  which  Mr.  Campbell  was  conuected. 
Some  of  the  brethren  became  alarmed  at  the  intro- 
duction of  a  preacher  among  them  holding  such  per- 
nicious error.  He  publicly  avowed  that  his  pecu- 
liar views  were  unchanged  ;  in  other  words,  that  he 
was  still  a  Universalist.  At  the  suggestion  of  Mr. 
Campbell,  it  was  agreed,  "  that  if  these  peculiar 
opinions  were  held  as  private  opinions,  an*d  not 
taught  by  this  brother,  he  might  be,  and  constitu- 
tionally ought  to  be  retained."  Mr.  Rains  declared 
that  his  views  were,  "  in  his  judgment,  matters  of 
opinion,  and  not  matters  of  faith,"  and  "  that  he 
would  not  teach  them,"  and  was  by  "  a  majority  of 
the  brethren"  sanctioned  as  a  proclaimer  of  the 
Reformation.     Mill.  Har.,  vol.  1,  148. 

Unitarianism,  in  all  its  phases,  from  high  Arian- 
ism  to  low  Socinianism,  is,  in  the  judgment  of  the 
Christian  world,  a  far  more  serious  error  than  Uni- 
versalism. It  divests  the  Gospel  of  its  distinctive 
glory,  and  converts  it  into  a  lifeless,  cold,  and  ineffi- 
cient code  of  ethics.  The  atonement  of  Christ, 
deriving  its  efiicacy  from  the  essential  and  infinite 


312  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS   DISCIPLINE, 

dignity  of  his  person^  is  the  only  foundation  of  a 
sinner's  hope  and  consolation.  The  Reformers 
received  Unitarians  into  their  fellowship,  and  sanc- 
tioned their  ministrations  with  a  full  knowledge  of 
their  errors.  In  the  early  part  of  the  present  cen- 
tury, a  party  of  New  Lights,  headed  hy  the  Rev. 
Barton  W.  Stone,  in  the  State  of  Kentucky, 
becanie  Arians.  In  a  letter  to  the  Christian  Bap- 
tist, published  in  the  year  1827,  he  used  this 
language  :  "  If  these  observations  be  true,  will  it 
not  follow  undeniably,  that  the  Word  {di'  hou)  by 
whom  all  things  were  made,  was  not  the  only  true 
God,  but  a  person  that  existed  with  the  only  true 
God  before  creation  began,  not  from  eternity,  else 
he  must  be  the  only  true  God  ;  but  long  before  the 
reign  of  Augustus  Csesar."  p.  37.  Mr.  Stone's 
views  of  the  atonement  were  in  harmony  with  his 
conceptions  of  the  person  of  Christ.  He  entirely 
rejected  the  vicarious  and  expiatory  nature  of  Christ's 
sufferings  ;  and  maintained  that  they  contributed 
to  the  salvation  of  men  only  as  illustrating  the 
Divine  goodness,  they  constituted  a  strong  motive 
to  repentance  and  piety.  The  efficacy  of  Christ's 
death  was  resolved  by  him  entirely  into  the  power 
of  moral  suasion.  Mill.  Har.,  New  Series,  vol.  5, 
pp.  63,  64.  The  peculiar  views  of  Mr.  Stone  were 
cordially  embraced  by  the  sect  of  which  he  was  the 
leader.  This  party,  without  any  change  in  their 
religious  tenets,  coalesced  with  the  Reformers  in 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    DIbCIPLINE.  313 

the  West.  Mr.  Campbell  aiid  Mr.  Stone,  the  prin- 
cipal leaders  of  the  Reformation,  had  a  discussion 
on  the  points  on  which  they  so  widely  differed,  and 
iu  his  concluding  article  the  former  used  the  follow- 
ing language — ""  The  discussion,  on  my  part,  was 
undertaken  with  a  reference  to  two  points  :  The 
first,  the  transcendent  importance  of  the  question 
itself — For  what  did  Christ  die  ?  The  second,  a 
very  general  misconception,  and  consequent  misre- 
presentation of  our  views  of  it.  I  did,  I  confess, 
expect  that  brother  Stone  would  have  more  fully 
and  satisfactorily  relieved  himself  and  the  cause  of 
the  Reformation  from  the  imputation  of  some  of 
our  opponents  on  the  subject  of  Unitarianism  in  its 
sectarian  acceptation."     p.  538. 

Of  the  extent  to  which  the  Arian  notions  of  Mr. 
Stone  did  formerly,  or  do  now,  prevail  among  the 
Reformers,  I  have  no  means  of  ascertaining.  In 
the  year  1844,  I  made  a  tour  in  the  West,  of  which 
notes  were  published  on  my  return  in  the  Religious 
Herald.  From  the  notes  I  extract  substantially  the 
following  paragraph,  the  statements  in  which,  so 
fur  as  I  have  seen,  have  never  been  called  in  ques- 
tion, and  which,  I  presume,  cannot  be  successfully 
contradicted. 

"  In  the  town  of  Columbia,  Missouri,  and  its 
vicinity,  the  Disciples,  better  known  as  Campbcll- 
ites,  are  somewhat  numerous.  They  were  formerly 
profossedh  Arians,  but  some  years  since  they  united 


314  CAMrBELLISM    IF    ITS   DISCIPLINE 

witli  the  followers  of  Mr.  Alexander  Campbell.  I 
took  much  pains  to  learn  whether  their  views  of  t  la 
divinity  of  Christ  had  undergone  a  satisfactory 
change.  All,  with  whom  I  conversed  on  the  sub- 
ject, concurred  in  testifying  that  they  reject  the 
doctrine  of  Christ's  divinity,  and  of  his  substitu- 
tional and  piacular  sufferings.  One  of  the  Profes- 
sors of  the  University  of  Mo,,  (situated  at  this 
place,)  informed  me  that  in  a  conversation  which 
he  held  with  Mr.  A.,  a  distinguished  preacher  of  the 
denomination  in  this  State,  he  most  distinctly  re- 
pudiated these  vital  principles  of  the  evangelic 
system.  One  thing  is  certain — the  Disciples  are 
not  ignorant  of  the  fact  that  they  are  generally  be- 
lieved to  be  Arians  ;  and  under  this  imputation 
they  patiently  lie.  Unless  ihere  is  a  strange  and 
prevalent  misconception  in  the  community,  these 
Disciples  stand  in  most  urgent  need  of  a  thorough 
doctrinal  refoiToation." 

Mr.  Campbell  inquires,  "Have  they  (creeds)  not 
been  the  fruitful  cause  or  occasion,"  not  of  some,  or 
of  most,  but  "  of  all  the  discords,  schisms,  and 
parties  now  existing  in  Christendom  ?"  Chn. 
Sys.,  p.  108.  I  presume,  he  would  now  cheerfully 
retract  this  assertion — ^for,  though  in  the  interroga- 
tory form,  it  was  intended  to  be  an  emphatic  asser- 
tion. Certainly,  some  pretty  well  defined  and 
serious  errors  have  sprung  up  in  the  bosom  of  the 
Reformation,  and  have  given  rise  to  no  little  iiscord 


CAMPBELLlSM   IN   ITS    DISCIPLINE,  315 

And  party  spirit.  John  Thomas,  M.  D.,  an  Englisli- 
man,  early,  and  with  marked  zeal,  enlisted  under 
the  tanner  of  the  Keformation,  He  was  the  first 
Disciple  who  manifested  any  disposition  to  do  his 
own  thinking.  All  doctrines  bearing  the  Bethany 
stamp  were  current  among  the  Reformers,  and  were 
received,  I  will  not  say,  without  examination,  hut 
certainly  with  great  readiness  and  cordiality.  Dr. 
Thomas  aspired  to  be,  not  a  subordinate,  but  a  co- 
ordinate Eeformer.  He  admired,  and  extolled  Mr. 
Campbell,  approved  of  the  Keformation,  so  far  as 
it  had  been  carried,  but  he  was  desirous  to  see  it 
advanced  to  perfection,  and  he  engaged  with  com- 
mendable ardor,  in  the  effort  to  increase  the  light  of 
the  Reformation.  New  light  he  soon  thought  he 
discovered.  He  proposed  to  introduce  new  prin- 
ciples and  practices  into  the  Reformation.  He 
maintained,  with  perfect  consistency,  that  persons 
who  had  been  baptized  without  proper  views  of  the 
nature  and  design  of  baptism — ignorant  of  the  new, 
or,  as  he  deemed  it,  the  old  theory  of  baptismal  re- 
mission— should  be  re-immersed,  according  to  the 
true  intent  and  spirit  of  the  ordinance.  Mr, 
Campbell  agreed  theoretically  with  the  new  Re- 
former on  this  point ;  for  in  his  debate  with  Rice, 
he  said,  "  Now  if  our  baptism  is  for  any  other  end 
or  purpose  than  was  that  to  which  Paul  submitted, 
it  is  another  baptism,  as  much  as  bathing  for  health 
U  different  from  a  Jewish  ablution   for  Icjral  un- 


316  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   DISCIPIINE. 

cleanness  or  impuritj-.  The  action  lias  a  ucaiiing 
and  a  design  ;  and  it  Ti.ust  he  received  in  that  rruan- 
'  ing,  and  for  that  design,  else  it  is  another  baptism.''' 
p.  439.  Mr.  Campbell  and  many  of  his  disciples 
*'ere  baptized  without  any  knowledge  of  the  true 
import  and  design  of  the  ordinance  ;  but  whether 
they  did  not  perceive  the  logical  consequence  of 
their  doctrine,  or  were  unwilling  to  follow  the 
guidance  of  the  rising  Reformer,  is  not  apparent — 
but  certainly  they  refused  to  receive  baptism  ac- 
cording to  the  meaning  and  design  which  they  as- 
cribed to  it.  Many,  however,  embraced  Dr.  T.'s 
doctrine,  and  with  new  light  and  fresh  joy,  were 
re-immersed  into  the  name  of  the  Father,  Son,  and 
Holy  Spirit.  I  have  not  access  to  any  authorized 
standard,  if  such  there  is,  of  Dr.  Thomas'  religious 
faith  and  opinions.  Eev.  N.  L.  Rice,  in  his  Debate 
with  Mr.  Campbell,  spoke  of  him  and  his  doctrines, 
as  follows,  p.  793.  "  Dr.  Thomas,  of  Virginia,  a 
prominent  preacher  in  the  gentleroan's  church,  con- 
tended that  men  have  no  souls — that  they  are  con- 
stituted of  body,  blood,  and  breath — that  the  word 
soul,  in  the  Scripture,  means  breath — and  that  in- 
fants, idiots,  pagans,  and  Paedobaptists,  are  annihi- 
lated. My  friend  opposed  his  doctrines  ;  tut  the 
Doctor  insisted  that  he  had  received  his  training 
in  Ireland  and  Scotland,  "where  the  people  believe 
in  ghosts  and  witches,  and  that,  although  a  great 
reformer,  he  was  n  *  quite  reformed.     Mr,  Camp- 


CAMPBELLTSM   IX   ITS   DiSCirLIXE.  317 

bell  at  length  refused  to  hold  Christian  iillowship 
with  him,  and  called  on  the  church  of  which  he  was 
a  member,  to  excommunicate  him." 

The  fulminatious  of  Bethany  were  not  heeded  by 
the  Doctor's  church.  They  had  been  initiated  into 
the  mysteries  of  a  higher  and  more  glorious  Eefor- 
mation  ;  and  they  would  not  consent  to  sacrifice 
their  new  and  gifted  guide  to  appease  the  wrath  of 
their  early,  and  once  honored,  but  now  forsaken 
teacher.  Owing  to  the  intractable  spirit  of  tho 
new  Keformers,  Mr.  Campbell  found  it  necessary  to 
change  the  voice  of  denunciation  into  that  of  argu- 
ment, and  finally  of  conciliation  and  compromise. 
The  leaders  met  in  Amelia  County,  Virginia,  and 
after  discussing  the  points  at  issue  between  them 
three  days,  without  any  change  in  the  views  of 
either,  they,  through  the  influence  of  common 
friends,  became  reconciled,  and  consented  to  co- 
operate in  promoting  the  Keformation.  The  terms 
of  their  reconciliation,  taken  from  Dr.  Thomas' 
paper,  arc  recorded  in  the  Mill.  Har.,  New  Series, 
vol.  3,  pp.  74,  75. 

"  We,  the  undersigned  brethren,  in  free  consul- 
tation, met  at  the  house  of  brother  John  Tinsley 
Jeter,  at  Paineville  ;  and  after  frankly  -comparing 
our  views,  unanimously  agreed  upon  the  resolution 
subjoined,  and  submitted  the  same  for  the  cousider- 
ation  of  brethren  Campbell  and  Thomas  ;  and  bro- 
tlior  Thomas  asreeinsr  to  abide  the  same,  all  difiicul- 


318  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS    DISCIPI  iNE. 

ties  were  adjusted,  and  perfect  harm6ny  and  co- 
operation mutually  agreed  upon  between  them. 

"  Resolved,  That  whereas  certain  things  believed 
and  propagated  by  Dr.  Thomas,  in  relation  to  the 
mortality  of  man,  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and 
the  final  destiny  of  the  wicked,  having  given  offence 
to  many  brethren,  and  being  likely  to  produce  a 
division  amongst  us  ;  and  believing  the  said  views 
to  be  of  no  practical  benefit,  we  recommend  to 
brother  Thomas  to  discontinue  the  discussion  of  the 
same,  unless  in  his  defense  when  misrepresented. 

"  Signed  by — Wm.  A.  Stone,  Thomas  E.  Jeter, 
et  als.  The  resolution  being  agreed  upon  by  the 
brethren,  brother  Campbell  and  myself  were  re- 
quested to  appear  before  them.  The  result  of  their 
deliberations  was  reported  to  us  ;  we  acquiesced  in 
the  recommendation  after  a  few  words  of  mutual  ex- 
planation ;  and  having  recognized  our  Christian 
fraternity,  the  brethren  gave  in  their  names  to 
brother  Stone  to  be  appended  in  the  order  affixed. 

Paineville,  Amelia,  Va.,  Nov.  15th,  1838." 

Dr.  Thomas,  whose  monstrous  errors  had  induced 
Mr.  Campbell,  in  violation  of  his  own  principles  of 
phurch  organization,  to  denounce  him  as  unworthy 
of  Christian  fellowship,  was,  as  it  appears  from  the 
above  articles  of  agreement,  not  only  retained  in 
"  Christian  fraternity,"  but  sancti<3ned  as  a  co-ope- 
rator in  the  Reformation  ;  on  condition  that  he 
Bhould  abstain  fiom  the  discussion  of  his  peculiar 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    JTS    DISCIPLINE.  319 

articles  of  belief,  ^'unless  in  Ms  defense,  when  mis- 
represented." 

It  certainly  can  surprise  no  man  acquainted  with 
the  condition  and  tendencies  of  the  world,  to  learn 
that  a  community,  rejecting  and  ridiculing  "  expe- 
rience before  baptism,"  and  whose  creed  consisted 
in  the  simple  and  single  article,  "  I  believe  that 
Jesus  of  Nazareth  is  the  Christ,"  should  gather  into 
its  capacious  bosom  a  heterogeneous  multitude  of 
persons  of  almost  every  variety  of  creed.  The  unity 
which  distinguished  the  early  Keformers  after  a  few 
years  began  to  be  broken.  The  language  of  Ashdod 
began  to  be  mingled  with  the  pure  speech  of  Canaan. 
One  principle  of  the  Keformation  is  that  every 
church  member  is  an  authorized  preacher  of  the 
Gospel.  "  He  may,"  says  Mr.  Campbell,  "  of  right 
preach,  baptize,  and  dispense  the  supper,  as  icell  as 
pray  for  all  men,  lohen  circumstances  demand  it." 
Chn.  Sys.,  p.  82.  Under  the  stimulating  influence 
of  the  Reformation  ministers  of  the  word  were  mul- 
tiplied rather  too  rapidly,  in  the  judgment  of  the 
Reformer.  Some  had  the  "vanity,  self-esteem,  or 
boldness  to  assume  an  office,  and  a  character,  which 
neither  the  church  on  earth  nor  in  heaven"  awarded 
to  them.  In  his  efforts  to  correct  this  growing  evil, 
]\Ir.  Campbell  made  the  following  frank,  and,  no 
doubt,  truthful  acknowledgment.  Mill.  Har.,  vol. 
6,  No.  2,  1    64. 

"  The  cause  of   Reformation  has  suffered    more 


320  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    DISCirLINE. 

frcm  this  portion  of  its  pretended  friends  than  from 
all  its  enemies  put  together.  This  state  of  things 
is  indeed  generally  attendant  on  the  incipiency  of 
all  public  and  social  institutions"  (A  very  proper 
apology  for  the  bitter  fruits  of  the  Ancient  Gospel). 
"  But  we  hove  had  a  very  large  portion  of  this  un- 
happTj  and  mischievous  influence  to  contend  with. 
Every  sort  of  doctrine  has  been  proclaimed  by  almost 
all  sorts  of  preachers,  under  the  broad  banners  and 
ivith  the  supposed  sanction  of  the  begun  Reformation. 
We  are  glad  to  follow,  rather  than  to  lead  public 
opinion  amongst  ourselves  on  this  subject.  Expe- 
rience teaches  with  effect,  what  theory  could  not 
accomplish." 

"  Every  sort  of  doctrine  has  been  proclaimed,  by 
almost  all  sorts  of  preachers" — these  are  precisely 
the  effects  which  I  should,  a  pinori,  expect  to  flow 
from  the  fundamental  principle  of  church  organiza- 
tion adopted  by  the  Reformers  ;  and  to  the  existence 
of  which  Mr.  Campbell  has  borne  an  incidental  and 
reluctant,  but  most  explicit  testimony.  Persons, 
holding  gross  and  mischievous  errors,  have  crept 
into  the  purest  and  best  governed  churches  of  Christ ; 
but  they  enter  them  in  violation  of  the  principles  of 
their  organization,  and  remain  in  them,  so  long  as 
they  do  jemain,  in  spite  of  their  system  of  discipline. 
Into  the  'Reformed  churches  they  enter  constitu- 
tionally, and  from  them  they  cannot  be  excluded 
without  an  abandonment  of  their  basis  of  union.. 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   DISCIPLINE.  321 

As  the  point  under  discussion  is  of  great  import- 
ance, it  is  proper  that  we  should  attend  to  what 
Mr.  Camphell  has  to  say  on  it.  I  quote  from  his 
Christianity  Reafored,  pp.  122,  123. 

"  I  will  now  show  how  they  cannot  make  a  sect  of 
us.  We  will  acknowledge  all  as  Christians  who 
acknowledge  the  Gospel  facts,  and  ohey  Jesus  Christ. 
But,  says  one,  will  you  receive  a  Unitarian.?  No  ; 
nor  a  Trinitarian.  We  will  have  neither  Unitarians 
nor  Trinitarians.  How  can  this  he !  Systems 
make  Unitarians  and  Trinitarians.  Renounce  the 
system,  and  you  renounce  its  creatures. 

"  But  the  «reatures  of  other  systems  now  exist, 
and  some  of  them  will  come  in  your  way.  How  will 
you  dispose  of  them  ?  I  answer,  We  will  unmake 
them.  Again  I  am  asked.  How  will  you  unmake 
them  ?  I  answer.  By  laying  no  emphasis  upon  their 
opinions. 

"  What  is  a  Unitarian  ?  One  who  contends  that 
Jesus  Christ  is  not  the  Son  of  God.  Such  a  one 
has  denied  the  faith,  and  therefore  we  reject  him. 
But,  says  a  Trinitarian,  many  Unitarians  acknow- 
ledge that  Jesus  Christ  is  the  Son  of  God  in  a  sense 
of  their  own.  Admit  it.  Then  I  ask,  IIow  do  you 
know  they  have  a  sense  of  their  own  ?  Intuitively, 
or  by  their  words  ?  Not  intuitively,  hut  hy  their 
words.  And  what  are  these  words  ?  Are  they 
Bible  words.?  If  they  are,  we  cannot  object  to 
them — if  they  are  not,  ^-e  will  i  li  hear  them  ;  or, 


322  CAMPBELLISM    IN   ITS    DISCIPLINE. 

what  is  the  same  thing,  we  will  not  discuss  them  at 
all.  If  he  will  ascribe  to  Jesus  all  Bible  attributes, 
namee,  works,  and  worship,  we  will  not  fight  with 
him  about  scholastic  words  :  but  if  he  will  not 
ascribe  to  him  every  thing  that  the  first  Christians 
ascribed,  and  worship  and  adore  him  as  the  first 
Christians  did,  we  will  reject  him,  not  because  of 
his  private  opinions,  but  because  he  refuses  to  honor 
Jesus  as  the  first  converts  did,  and  withholds  from 
him  the  titles  and  honors  which  God  and  his  apostles 
have  bestowed  upon  him. 

"  In  like  manner  we  will  deal  with  a  Trinitarian. 
If  he  will  ascribe  to  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Spirit,  all  that  the  first  believers  ascribed,  and  no- 
thing more,  we  will  receive  him — ^but  we  will  not 
allow  him  to  apply  scholastic  and  barbarous  epi- 
thets to  the  Father,  the  Son,  or  the  Holy  Spirit. 
If  he  will  dogmatize  and  become  a  factionist,  we  re- 
ject him — not  because  of  his  opinions,  but  because 
of  his  attempting  to  make  a  faction,  or  to  lord  it 
over  God's  heritage. 

"And  will  you  receive  a  Universalist  too?  No; 
not  as  a  Universalist.  If  a  man,  professing  Uni- 
versalist  opinions,  should  apply  for  admission,  we 
will  receive  him,  if  he  will  consent  to  use  and  apply 
all  the  Bibk  phrases  in  their  plain  reference  to  the 
future  state  of  men  and  angels.  We  will  not 
hearken  to  tnose  questions  which  gender  strife,  nor 
discuss   them  at  all      If  a  person   say  such  is  his 


"   CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   DISCIPLINE.  323 

private  opinion,  let  him  liave  it  as  liis  private  opin- 
ion ;  but  lay  no  stress  upon  it :  and  if  it  be  a  wrong 
private  opinion,  it  will  die  a  natural  death  much 
sooner  than  if  you  attempt  to  kill  it." 

As  this  quotation  contains  the  gist  of  the  Camp- 
bellite  discipline,  I  must  be  permitted  to  subject  it 
to  a  careful  examination. 

Mr.  Campbell  teaches,  in  the  above  extract,  that 
Unitarians  and  Universalists  are  to  be  received 
into  the  church,  provided  they  will  consent  to  hold 
their  peculiar  views  as  "  private  opinions."  How- 
ever erroneous  and  unscriptural  may  be  their  opin- 
ions, they  have  the  full  right  to  hold  them  in  the 
church,  if  they  will  forbear  to  obtrude  them  on 
others.  "  We  do  not  ask  them,"  he  says,  "  to  give 
up  their  opinions  ;  we  ask  them  only  not  to  impose 
them  on  others,"     Chn'ty  Kestored,  p.  121 

It  may  seem  strange  to  some  that  the  Bethany 
Reformer,  who  is  so  zealous  an  advocate  for  the  use 
of  a  "pure  speech,"  and  furnishes  in  the  context  of 
the  extract  under  discussion,  a  long  catalogue  of 
words  and  phrases,  condemned  simply  on  the  ground 
that  they  are  not  found  in  the  Scriptures,  should 
have  made  such  frequent  and  important  use  of  the 
term  opinions — a  term  never  employed  by  the 
writers  of  the  New  Testament.  There  is  no  valid 
objection  to  the  use  of  this,  or  any  other  dignified 
term,  in  religious  discussions,  provided  it  is  clearly 
denned,  or  well  understood.     What  does  he  mean 


324  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    DISCIPLIInE. 

by  this  word  ?  He  has  not  made  any  attempt  tc 
explain  it — to  inform  us  where  faith  ends  and  opin- 
ion begins. 

Does  he  use  the  term  opinion  to  denote  specula- 
tions on  subjects  confessedly  not  included  within  the 
scope  of  revelation  ?  This  can  hardly  be  the  sense 
in  which  he  uses  it ;  for  there  is  no  person  in 
Christendom  who  maintains  that  an  agreement  in 
such  opinions  is  essential  to  church  fellowshij). 

Does  he  by  the  term  opinion  mean  the  views 
which  men  entertain  concerning  the  import  of  the 
Scriptures  ?  I  understand  him  to  maintain  that 
the  persuasion  of  the  Universalist,  that  the  Bible 
teaches  the  final  salvation  of  all  men,  and  of  the 
Unitarian,  that  Christ  is  not  a  divine  being,  but 
merely  an  exalted  man,  are  opinions j  which  they  are 
at  liberty  to  hold  privately. 

This  unscriptural  and  artificial  distinction  can  be 
of  no  avail  to  the  cause  of  the  Reformer,  Whatever 
he  may  call  the  peculiar  views  of  the  Unitarians 
and  Universalists,  they  are  clearly  and  avowedly 
matters  of  faith.  The  Unitarian  believes  that  the 
Scriptures  do  most  unequivocally  teach,  that  Jesus, 
the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  is  not  the  true  God,  but 
a  creature.  If  this  persuasion  is  with  the  Unitarian, 
not  an  article  of  faith,  but  a  mere  opinion  ;  then  it 
follows,  that  the  persuasion  of  Mr,  Campbell,  that 
Christ  is  a  divine  being,  is  not  a  matter  of  faith,  but 
a   mere    opinion.     The    Universalist    believes   that 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    DISCIPLINE.  325 

God  has  clearly  revealed  the  final  salvation  of  all 
men — ^he  receives  the  doctrine  on  what  he  deems 
divine  testimony — and  if  this  persuasion  is  not  faith, 
it  may  be  reasonably  questioned  whether  there  is 
any  faith  on  earth.  Now,  allowing  that  unity  of 
opinion  is  not  necessary  in  order  to  church  fellow- 
ship, the  admission  cannot  help  Mr.  Campbell  out 
of  his  difficulty.  For  the  differences  between  Trini- 
tarians and  Unitarians  are  not  mere  differences  of 
opinion- — but  are  diiferences  in  faith — on  funda- 
mental principles  of  faith,  if  there  be  any  such. 

But  call,  if  you  please,  the  peculiar  views  of  Uni- 
tarians, Universalist^,  &c.,  opinions,  and  not  faith. 
I  utterly  object  to  Mr.  Campbell's  sweeping  exclu- 
sion of  all  opinions  from  the  basis  of  Christian 
Union.  There  are  some  opinions  which  entirely 
contravene  the  essential  doctrine  of  the  Bible.  For 
example — it  is  a  doctrine  of  the  Bible,  that 
Jesus  of  Nazareth  is  the  Son  of  God.  The  Uni- 
tarian admits  this  doctrine,  but  entertains  the  opin- 
ion that  the  phrase  "  Son  of  God,"  imports,  not  his 
divinity,  or  essential  Godhead,  but  his  great  eleva- 
tion among  creatures.  Now,  here  the  opinion  of 
the  Unitarian,  and  the  doctrine  of  the  Bible  are  at 
issue.  Let  us  now  sec  the  effect  of  the  great  solvent 
by  which  Mr.  Campbell  j)roposes  to  melt  into  one 
all  the  discordant  elements  of  Christendom.  The 
Unitarian  and  Mr.  Campbell  use  precisely  the  same 
words — "  a  pure  speech,"  "  Bible  terms," — but  they 


326  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS   DISCIPLINE, 

attacli  widely  diflPerent  meanings  to  them — and  know 
that  they  do  ;  and  yet,  because  they  use  the  same 
words,  they  profess  to  have  unity  of  faith.  They 
speak  the  same  terms,  with  meanings  as  wide  apart 
as  the  poles,  and  then  boast  of  their  harmony. 
What  is  this  but  sheer  Jesuitism  ? 

But  Mr.  Campbell  imposes  a  wholesome  restric- 
tion on  his  Unitarian  or  Universalist  brother.  "  If 
any  person  say  such  is  his  private  opinion,  let  him 
have  it  as  his  private  opinion."  Whence  did  Mr. 
Campbell  derive  this  rule  ?  Why  did  he  not  furnish 
the  chapter  and  verse,  where  it  is  recorded  ?  It  is 
an  important  law  :  I  should  be  glad  to  know  its 
author.  As  Mr.  Campbell  does  not  pretend  to 
claim  for  it  divine  authority,  I  must  enquire  into 
its  propriety.  If  these  private  opinions  are  innox- 
ious— do  not  unfit  their  holders  for  church  fellow- 
ship— ^why  may  they  not  be  propagated  ?  What 
evil  can  arise  from  the  diffusion  of  such  harmless 
opinions?  "If  he  (the  Trinitarian)  will  dogmatize 
and  become  a  factionist,  we  reject  him," — says  Mr, 
Campbell.  But  suppose  the  Unitarian  does  not 
dogmatize,  or  become  factious,  but  seeks,  "  not  as 
lording  it  over  God's  heritage,"  but  by  kind  and 
persuasive  arguments  to  convince  men  that  Christ 
is  not  God,  and  that  his  death  was  not  vicarious, 
will  he  be  tolerated  ?  It  would  seem  not,  from  the 
quotation  under  consideration.  But  this  conclusion 
draws  after  it  another  consequence.     Mr.  Campbell, 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS   DISCIPLINE.  327 

af  course,  claims  no  preeminence  over  liis  Unitarian 
brother.  Then,  as  the  Unitarian  must  not  proclaim 
his  peculiar  opinions  of  the  person  and  work  of 
Christ,  so  neither  must  Mr.  Campbell.  But  what 
then  is  the"  moral  value  of  the  stereotyped  propo- 
sition, Jesus,  the  Nazarene,  is  the  Messiah  ?  It 
means  everything,  and  it  means  nothing  ;  and  what 
it  does  mean  no  man  may  say  ! 

But  Mr.  Campbell  has  prepared  a  way  of  escape 
from  this  logical  sequence.  He  has  been  careful 
not  to  doom  himself  and  his  brethren,  Unitarians 
and  Universalists,  to  absolute  silence  as  to  Scripture 
doctrine'.  They  may  use  Scripture  terms  in  a  Scrip- 
tural sense,  "  If  he  (the  Unitarian)  will  ascribe  to 
Jesus  all  Bible  attributes,  names,  works,  and  wor- 
ship, we  will  not  fight  with  him  about  scholastic 
words."  "  If  a  man  professing  Universalist  opin- 
ions, should  apply  for  admission,  we  will  receive 
him,  if  he  will  consent  to  use  and  apply  all  the  Bible 
phrases  in  their  plain  reference  to  the  future  state 
of  men  and  angels."  The  law  of  Christian  fellow- 
ship, prescribed  by  the  Reformation,  is  that  all  shall 
use  Bible  terms,  in  the  Bible  sense,  in  speaking  of 
Bible  things.  This  is  quite  specious.  I  do  not 
know  who  made  this  law,  but  I  know  who  has 
broken  it,  Mr,  Campbell  has  been  a  most  flagrant 
transgressor  of  it.  In  his  voluminous  works,  he  has 
discu.s3cd  almost  every  fact,  doctrine,  and  duty  of 
the  Christian  rcelation,  in  a  copious  variety  of  un- 


328  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS    DISCIPLINE. 

scriptural,  and  not  iinfrequently,  most  unwarrant- 
able terms.  But  who  is  to  decide  what  is  the 
"  plain  reference"  of  "  all  the  Bible  phrases/'  and 
when  a  man  ascribes  to  Jesus  "every  thing  that 
the  first  Christians  ascribed  ?"  Is  the  professor 
himself  ?  Then  there  is  no  restriction  on  church 
fellowship,  except  what  each  person  may  choose  to 
impose  on  himself  Is  Mr.  Campbell,  of  Bethany  ? 
Then  he  is  a  pope,  and  ought  to  be  infallible.  Is 
the  church  to  decide  ?  Then  an  agreement,  not 
merely  in  the  belief  of  facts,  or,  properly  of  "  one 
fact,"  but  in  opinions  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  words 
and  phrases  in  which  the  important  facts  and  doc- 
trines of  revelation  are  expressed,  is  by  implication 
clearly  admitted  as  necessary  to  church  union  ;  and 
consequently  there  must  be  in  every  such  decision, 
an  expression,  clearly  indicated,  of  this  agreement. 
I  am  not  y^t  done  with  this  remarkable  system 
of  church  discipline.  The  Trinitarian  fares  no  bet- 
ter than  the  Unitarian  or  Universalist  in  the  "cur- 
rent Eeformation."  "  If  he  will  ascribe,"  says  Mr. 
Campbell,  "  to  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit, 
all  that  the  first  believers  ascribed,  and  nothing 
more,  we  will  receive  him — hut  we  will  not  allow 
him  to  apply  scholastic,  and  barbarous  epithets  to 
the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit"  I  have 
searched  the  lively  oracles  in  vain  for  this  restric- 
tive law.  It  is  not  found  in  the  creeds  of  the  sects, 
the  decrees  of  councils,  nor  the  bulls  of  popes.     It 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   DISCIPLINE.  329 

bears  unmistakable  marks  of  its  Bethany  origin. 
It  hath  "  the  image  and  superscription"  of  Mr. 
Alexander  Campbell.  But  let  us  scrutinize  it. 
"  Scholastic"  means  pertaining  to  a  scholar,  or 
scholar  like.  A  "  scholastic  epithet"  is  a  term  by 
which  a  scholar  would  express  the  quality  of  a  per- 
son or  thing.  "  Barbarous"  is  synonymous  with 
unlettered,  uncultivated.  A  "barbarous  epithet" 
is  such  a  word  as  an  illiterate  man  would  employ  to 
denote  the  quality  of  a  person  or  thing.  The  pro- 
scriptive  rule  is  exceedingly  comprehensive  and  rig- 
orous. It  permits  neither  learned  nor  unlearned 
terms  to  be  applied  to  the  Father,  the  Son,  or  the 
Holy  Sjjirit.  And  the  Reformer  speaks,  if  not  with 
pontifical,  certainly  with  no  hesitating  authority — 
"  We  will  not  allow  him  to  apply  scholastic  and  bar- 
barous epithets,"  &c.  Having  consicjered  the  im- 
port and  authority  of  the  law,  let  us  inquire  into  its 
reasonableness.  A  Unitarian  who  believes  that 
Christ  was  a  mere  man,  or  an  imperfect  man,  and 
that  he  died  only  as  a  witness  of  the  truth,  if  he  will 
consent  to  call  his  belief  an  opinion,  and  keep  it 
private,  or  use  only  Scriptural  terms,  which  he 
knows  are  understood  by  those  who  hear  him  in  a 
sense  entirely  opposite  to  that  in  which  he  employs 
them,  must  be  received  into  Christian  fellowship. 
He  is  worthy  of  all  confidence,  and  fraternal  love, 
though,  according  to  Mr.  Campbell's  judgment,  he 
errs  on  a  fundamental  point  of  the  Christian  system. 


330         •     CAMPBELLISM    IN   ITS   DISCIPLINE, 

But  if  a  Trinitarian,  witli  sound  views  of  the  Gospel, 
and  a  heart  glowing  with  its  spirit,  in  his  learning, 
aj)plies  an  erudite,  or,  in  his  simplicity,  applies  ai. 
unrefined  epithet  "  to  the  Father,  the  Son,  or  the 
Holy  Spirit,"  to  illustrate  his  perfections,  or  exal^. 
his  glory,  he  must  he  rejected.  And  what  is  this 
but  to  exalt  words  above  truth,  and  to  sacrifice 
"  unity  in  the  faith,  and  in  the  knowledge  of  the 
Son  of  God,"  on  the  altar  of  a  barren,  heartless,  sense- 
less agreement  in  words  and  phrases  ?  And  what, 
permit  me  farther  to  inquire,  must  be  the  moral 
influence  of  that  church  which  virtually  abolishes 
the  distinction  between  truth  and  error  ?  Nay,  worse 
still,  which  gives  to  covert  Unitarianism  a  marked 
preference  over  Trinitarianism,  expressed,  in  epi 
thets  either  "  harharous,"  or  "  scJiolastic  ?"  And 
who  is  to  execute  this  new  and  inflexible  law? 
Every  Keformed  church.  We  will  not  allow  the 
use  of  scholastic  or  barbarous  epithets.  No  Trinita- 
rian, who  understands  his  duties  or  his  rights,  could 
consent  to  belong  to  a  church  claiming  a  power  so 
unauthorized  by  revelation,  and  so  abhorrent  to 
reason. 

I  have  not  yet  descended  to  the  bottom  of  this  pit. 
Every  man  who  knows  the  truth  is  bound  to  pub- 
lish it  to  others.  This  is  a  truth  for  the  early  and 
vigorous  advocacy  of  which  Mr.  Campbell  deserves 
praise.  I  honor  the  man  who  honestly,  boldly  and 
oarnestly  propagates  the  views,  call  them  faith  or 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    DISCIPLINE.  331 

.opinions,  winch  lie  deems  true  aud  important.  I 
prefer  a  candid,  out-spoken  Unitarian,  or  Universal- 
ist,  to  a  concealed  one.  Now,  what  does  the  Camp- 
bellite  discipline  do,  but  offer  a  reward  for  hypoc- 
risy ?  It  says  to  the  candidate  for  church  member- 
ship, if  you.  honestly  hold,  and  frankly  proclaim, 
what  we  deem  error,  we  cannot  receive  you  ;  but  if 
you  will  conceal  your  errors,  we  will  embrace  you 
with  fraternal  confidence  and  love.  We  have  no 
objection  to  your  errors — they  are  opinions — 
opinions  are  private  property—"  we  do  not  ask" 
you  "to  give  up"  your  "  opinions" — but,  whatever 
may  be  your  sense  of  duty,  you  must  hold  your 
opinions  "  as  private  property,"  or  if  you  express 
them  at  all,  it  must  be  in  "  Bible  phras^,  in  plain 
reference"  to  these  matters  of  opinion.  Now,  let 
any  discerning  man  say,  whether  the  hypocritical 
and  unscrupulous  errorist  is  not  treated  with  a  con- 
sideration and  affection  which  are  withheld  from  the 
honest  and  conscientious  errorist,  or  even  the  or- 
thodox Christian  who  expresses  truth  concerning 
the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  in  inter- 
dicted ejiithets. 

I  must  notice  another  point  in  this  remarkable 
extmct.  "  If  a  person,"  observes  the  Reformer, 
"  say  such  (Universalism)  is  his  private  opinion,  let 
him  have  it  as  his  private  opinion  ;  but  lay  no  stress 
upon  it  :  and  if  it  be  a  wrong  private  opiuior.,  it 
will  di,  a   natural  death  much   sooner  than  if  you 


332  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS    DISCIPLINE. 

attempt  to  Mil  it  "  Whether  Mr.  Campbell  intends 
this  as  a  general  or  particular  rule,  I  do  cot  know. 
Whether  this  specified  error,  or  all  error,  will  die 
soonest  by  being  let  alone,  Mr.  Campbell  does  not 
iaform  us.  Paul  did  not  think  the  errors  of  the 
^  Judaizing  teachers  would  perish  sooner  by  neglect. 
Christ  did  not  judge  that  the  doctrine  of  the  Nico- 
laitanes  would  die  the  sooner  if  there  was  no  attempt, 
to  oppose  it.  The  whole  of  Divine  revelation  is  h 
vigorous  combat  with  every  system  and  species  of 
error.  What  a  pity  it  is  that  Mr.  Cami)bell  did  not 
make  an  earlier  dis'covery  that  error  of  o])inion  will 
die  a  natural  death  sooner  than  it  can  be  killed. 
What  a  vast  saving  of  ink,  and  paper,  and  toil,  and 
anxiety,  aad  exasperation,  and  alienation,  it  might 
have  proved.  But  Mr.  Campbell  does  not  quite  lot 
error  alone.  He  closes  its  mouth,  or  limits  it  to  the 
use  of  Bible  phrases,  and  gives  it  a  home  and  coun- 
tenance, and  respectability  in  the  church — that  "  it 
may  die  a  natural  death." 

At  this  point,  so  far  as  the  present  discussion  is 
concerned,  the  notable  extract  might  be  dropped. 
But  for  the  purpose  of  showing  the  loose  and  inac- 
curate style  in  which  Mr.  Campbell  treats  the  most 
important  subjects,  another  sentence  must  be  no- 
ticed. "  What  is  a  Unitarian  ?"  To  this  question, 
he  replies,  "One  who  contends  that  Jesus  Christ  is 
NOT  the  Son  of  God."  Now,  it  may  be  safely 
affirmed,  that  Uk    Unitarian  has  ever  denied  that 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS    DISCIPLINE.  333 

Jesus  Christ  is  the  Son  of  God.  The  Unitarians 
not  only  believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Son  of  God,  but 
maintain  that  they  receive  him  as  the  Son  of  God, 
according  to  the  scriptural  and  rational  import  of 
the  phrase.  To  charge  them,  as  Mr.  Campbell  has 
done,  with  denying  that  Jesus  is  the  Son  of  God,  is 
to  do  them  gross  injustice — springing,  it  is  pre- 
sumed, so  far  as  he  is  concerned,  not  from  malice 
aforethoufjht  but  a  culpable  carelessness  in  the  use 
of  lan<];ua£;e. 

True,  in  the  same  extract,  he  represents  the 
Trinitarian  as  admitting,  that  "  many  Unitarians 
acknowledge  that  Jesus  Christ  is  the  Son  of  God  in 
a  sense  of  their  own,"  But  this  can  furnish  no 
apology  for  the  statement  he  mates  that  a  Unita- 
rian is  one  who  contends  that  Jesus  Christ  is  not  the 
Son  of  God." 

If  verbal  criticism  were  composed  of  flesh  and 
blood,  it  might  grow  fat  on  the  food  furni^ed  for 
its  nourishment  in  the  obscurities,  inaccuracies  and 
mistakes,  abounding  on  the  pages  of  the  Reformer. 

We  have  seen  that  Universalists  may  be  retained 
in  the  Reformed  churches  on  the  not  very  intelli- 
gible condition,  that  they  will  "consent  to  use 
and  apply  all  the  Bible  phrases  in  their  plain 
reference  to  the  future  state  of  men  and  angels  ;" 
or,  as  it  appears  from  the  compromise  with  Dr. 
Thomas,  "  to  discontinue  the  discussion  of  the  same, 
unless  it    Vnlr  d</insc  tcliei.  misrepresented."     But 


334         __  CAMPBELLISM    IN   ITS    DISCIPLINE. 

suppose  they  should  deem  it  incompatible  with  their 
duty  and  independence,  to  keep  silent,  or  act  merely 
on  the  defensive,  regarding  their  peculiar  doctrines 
or  points  of  faith  ?  What  then  ^  Does  the 
Reformation  make  any  provision  for  the  correction 
of  the  evil  ?  A  case  calling  for  correction  has 
recently  presented  itself.  The  "  current  Reforma- 
tion" has  been  quite  fruitful  of  heresies.  First, 
Dr.  Thomas  led  off  a  sect  of  Materialists ;  and 
lately  Mr.  J.  B,  Ferguson,  pastor  of  the  Reformed 
church  in  Nashville,  having  embraced  Universalist 
views,  is  sustained  by  a  majority  of  his  church.  The 
Millennial  Harbinger,  of  January,  copies  from  the 
Christian  Age  of  December  22,  as  follows  :  p.  55. 

"  Mr.  Clapp,  of  New  Orleans,  wrote  to  Mr.  Gui- 
ley,  of  Cincinnati,  alleging  that  Mr.  Ferguson  '  was 
with  them  fully  ;'  that  is,  that  he  was  a  thorough 
Universalist,  and  that  he  would  change  the  '  Camp- 
bellite  church  in  the  South.'  I  do  not  aim  to  give 
the  exact  words — I  give  the  exact  meaning." 
On  this  subject  Mr.  Campbell  says  : — 
"  That  Mr.  Ferguson  should  seek  to  retain  any 
position  among  us,  is  irreconcilable  with  any  other 
view  than  that  he  intends  to  create  a  party  in  favor 
'f  Universalism.  This  is  most  unquestionably  his 
civisign,  if  there  be  any  truth  in  the  documents," 
copied,  in  part,  from  the  Christian  Age,  above. 
"  Now,  we  award  to  every  man  what  we  claim  for 
ourselves — liberty  to  preach  and  teach  his  own  con- 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS    DISCIPLINE.  335 

victions.  But  we  must  hold  it  incompatible  with 
candor  and  honesty,  guilefully  to  hold  a  place 
amongst  us,  when  he  is  no  more  of  us  than  Messrs. 
Gurley  and  Quinby,  whom  he  endorses  and  com- 
mends as  worthy  of  the  most  ample  success,  in  pro- 
pagating bald  and  deformed  Universalism  ;  and  how 
any  church  amongst  us  can  choose  him  as  its  pastor, 
unless  they,  too,  are  ultra-Universaljists,  demands 
an  explanation,  which  is  alike  due  to  itself  and  to 
the  Christian  brotherhood." 

Concerning  the  above  statements  and  remarks, 
several  things  deserve  to  be  noted — 

1.  The  "  current  Keformation"  seems  likely  to 
produce  more  than  one  schism  for  every  generation, 
the  number  ascribed  by  Mr.  Campbell  to  every 
"  sectarian  creed." 

2.  It  is  proper  to  recommend  to  the  Keformers, 
a  patient  endurance  of  the  evils  for  the  removal  of 
which  their  system  has  made  no  adequate  provision. 
Mr.  Ferguson  occupies  the  foundation  of  Christian 
fellowship  on  which  he  was  built.  He  believes  one 
fact — ^has  submitted  to  one  institution — and  his 
"  deportment  accords  with  the  morality  and  virtue 
of  the  great  Prophet"  and  is,  therefore,  "  a  Chris- 
tian, as  defined,  not  by  Dr.  Johnson,  nor  any  creed- 
maker,  but  by  one  taught  from  heaven."  He  has 
violated  no  covenant.  Surely  the  Keformers  will 
not  excommunicate  and  anathematize  him  !  Then 
he  uj'irht  write    "  What  a  dani;erous  matter  it  has 


S36  CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    DISCIPLINE. 

become,  to  think  differently  from"  Mr.  Campbell 
and  his  friends  !  ''  How  perilous  to  view"  the 
future  state  "differently  from  the  '  keepers  of  the 
faith'  of  Tennessee  !  This  alone  exposes  a  person  to 
the  greatest  anathema  in  the  power  of  Reformers. 
They  can  do  no  more  in  Tennessee,  as  yet,  than  treat 
a  dissentient  as  they  would  a  murderer,  or  a  vile 
adulterer  !"  It  cannot  be  that  the  Disciples  will 
knowingly  subject  themselves  to  such  dreadful  impu- 
tations. 

3.  Should  Mr.  Campbell  succeed  in  persuading 
or  shaming  Mr.  Ferguson  and  his  party  into  an 
abandonment  of  their  position  in  the  ranks  of  the 
Disciples,  he  will  be  far  more  successful  than  the 
Baptists  were  in  their  early  struggles  with  Mr. 
Campbell  and  his  party.  It  was  more  than  sus- 
pected that  they  intended  "  to  create  a  party  in 
favor  of"  the  Beformation.  The  Baptists  were 
willing  to  award  to  them  what  they  claimed  for 
themselves — liberty  to  preach  and  teach  their 
own  convictions — ^but  they  thought  it  incompatible 
"  with  candor  and  honesty,"  for  men  whose  aim  was 
to  revolutionize  the  Baptist  churches — who  pro- 
nounced them  a  part  of  Babylon  the  Great — and 
whose  labors  were  spreading  discord  and  irahappi- 
ness  among  them — to  hold  a  place  in  their  churches. 
They  would  gladly  have  avoided  the  necessity  of 
excluding  the  Reformers — of  provoking  the  cry  of 
persecution — but  they  could  not.     The  Reformers 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   DISCIPLINE,  337 

did  not  deem  it  proper  to  retire  from  a  position 
which  gave  them  a  favorable  opportunity  for  propa- 
gating their  sentiments,  and  strengthening  their 
party.  The  cup  which  they  pressed  to  the  lips  of 
the  Baptists,  is  now  pressed  to  their  own  lips.  It 
is  bitter,  but  they  must  drink  it.  It  may  prove 
medicinal.  If  they  retain  the  errorists,  they  cherish 
in  their  own  bosom  a  faction  whose  aim  is  to  "  change 
the  Campbellite  church  in  the  South,"  and  if  they 
exclude  them,  they  sit  in  judgment  on  their  reli- 
gious faith,  follow  the  spirit  and  example  of  the 
creed-making  sects,  and  utterly  repudiate  their 
boasted  foundation  of  church  union.  They  are  in  a 
dilemma. 


T^ 


CAMPBELLISM  IN  ITS  TENDENCIES. 

J .  When  Mr,  Campbell  commenced  his  public  career, 
^lijlous  apprehensions  were  entertained,  by  the  most 
judicious  observers,  that  it  Avould  terminate  in  wild 
speculations,  fatal  error,  or,  perhaps,  downright  in- 
fidelity. Several  causes  contributed  to  create  and 
strengthen  this  apprehension.  His  religious  views 
underwent  early,  various,  and  rapid  changes.  From 
ultra-Calvinism  he  quickly  passed,  through  all  the 
doctrinal  stages,  to  low  Armiuianism — from  being  a 
Psedobaptist  ho  became  a  Baptist,  and  soon  left  all 
his  new  brethren  behind  in  his  zeal  for  the  ordinance 
of  baptism.  Other  important  changes  were  fre- 
quently occurring  in  his  religious  creed.  No  wonder 
that  considerate  Christians  were  prepared  to  see 
greater,  and  almost  any,  changes  taking  place  in 
his  views.  It  was  supposed  by  many  that  he  had  a 
pretty  strong  leaning  to  Unitarianism.  His  rejec- 
tion of  the  terms  Trinity,  and  Trinitarian,  some 
incautious  and  obscure  remarks  which  he  penned 
on  this  profound  subject,  and  the  early  coalition  of 
his  party  with  Mr.  Stone,  and  his  Arian  followers, 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   TENDENCIES,  339 

gave  birth  and  vigor  to  tlie  supposition.  Others, 
again,  suspected  tiiat  the  tendency  of  the  Eeforma- 
tion  was  towards  the  renunciation  of  all  spiritual 
religion,  and  the  adoption  of  a  heartless  formalism. 
This  fear  originated  from  the  irreverent  and  sarcas- 
tic manner  iu  which  he  treated  religious  experien- 
ces, and,  indeed,  the  whole  subject  of  earnest  piety. 
These  apprehensions  of  the  evil  tendencies  of  the 
Reformation  were  not  confined  to  its  opposers,  hut 
prevailed  with  many  who  viewed  the  labors  of  Mr. 
Campbell  with  more  or  less  favor  and  interest.  But 
Campbellism  was  not  destined  to  reahze,  at  any 
rate,  in  the  first  age  of  its  existence,  and  to  the  full 
extent,  these  fears. 

Several  conservative  influences  conspired  to  check 
the  evil  tendencies  of  the  system,  if  they  really  exist- 
ed. It  was  a  reaeeming  trait  of  the  Eeformation 
that  it  professed  great  reverence  for  the  holy  Scrip- 
tures. In  common  with  other  Protestant  Chris- 
tians, the  Reformers  maintained  the  supreme  au- 
thority of  revelation  in  matters  of  faith  ;  but  they 
gave  marked  and  unusual  prominence  to  this  point 
in  their  teaching.  An  unwillingness  to  tread  the 
beaten  track,  and  a  desire  to  furnish  original,  strik- 
ing and  systematic  expositions  of  the  Scriptures, 
made  them  very  unsafe  religious  guides  ;  yet  the 
custom  of  referring  all  questions  concerning  faith 
and  practice  to  the  arbitrament  of  the  Scriptures 
proved  to  be  the  sheet  anchor  of  their  preservation 


340  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS    TENDENv.IES. 

from  the  maelstrom  of  error  into  which  they  were 
"drifting.  They  were  mostly  diligent  and  careful 
readers  of  the  Bible  ;  but  they  read  it,  with  the 
glosses  it  received  at  Bethany,  Their  unavoidable 
association  and  intercourse  with  the  Christian  sects 
around  them  insensibly  exerted  over  them  a  conser- 
vative influence.  It  was  not  easy,  perhaps,  not 
possible  for  them,  to  rise  superior  to  the  influences 
which  by  books,  newspapers,  sermons,  and  conver- 
sations, were  constantly,  though,  for  the  most  part, 
unintentionally,  exerted  to  restrain  their  wander- 
ings, correct  their  errors,  modify  their  views,  and 
assimilate  them  to  the  surrounding  Christian  de- 
nominations. The  glory  of  being  a  discoverer  of 
truth,  and  a  reformer,  may  impel  a  man  to  endure, 
and  even  to  glory  in,  reproach  ;  but  others,  who  do 
not  aspire  after  this  glory,  will  gradually  seek,  at 
any  rate,  as  far  as  the  love  of  truth  will  permit,  to 
soften  the  asperities  of  an  unpopular  system,  and 
conform  it  to  the  prevailing  taste.  He  has  been  a 
careless  observer  of  Campbellism  who  has  not  per- 
ceived its  effort  to  get  rid  of  the  odium  theologicum 
by  conforming  its  teachings,  more  and  more,  to  the 
popular  views.  The  reader  may  find  a  striking  ex- 
emplification of  this  remark  in  Mr.  Campbell's  de- 
bate with  Kev.  N.  L.  Eice.  It  was  perfectly  obvioue 
throughout  the  discussion,  that  he  was  desirous  of 
being  accounted  orthodox  in  his  religious  princi- 
ples, and  nothing  so  much  annoyed  him  as  the  quo- 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   TENDENCIES.  341 

tation  of  heterodox  sentiments  from  his  early  writ- 
ings. 

Another  cause,  however,  contributed  more  than 
both  the  ahove,  to  restrain  the  erring  tendency  of 
the  Reformation,  and,  in  a  measure,  to  turn  it  into 
the  paths  of  sohriety  and  moderation.  This  cause 
was  Thomasism.  The  reader  has  already  seen  that 
L)r.  Thomas  embraced  the  principles  of  the  Refor- 
mation, and  proposed  to  follow  them  out  to  their 
legitimate  results.  His  views  and  labors  rendered 
him  very  unpopular,  and  brought  upon  the  Refor- 
mation great  reproach.  Mr.  Campbell,  in  opposing 
this  new  Reformation,  was  compelled  to  employ,  m 
part,  the  very  weapons  which  the  Baptists,  and 
other  evangelical  Christians,  had  used  in  their  con- 
tests with  him.  In  combating  the  errors  of  Dr. 
Thomas,  he  naturally  sought  sympathy  and  coun- 
tenance ;  and  where  could  these  be  found  except 
among  the  evangelical  sects  ?  But  if  these  were  to 
be  conciliated,  they  must  be  won,  not  by  derision 
and  contempt,  but  by  candid  and  kind  words,  a  re- 
turn to  evangelical  principles,  and  the  exemplifica- 
tion of  the  true  Christian  spirit.  From  the  rise  of 
Thomasism  may  be  dated  the  decline  of  the  vaunt- 
ing, pugnacious  spirit  of  the  Reformation.  Internal 
discussions  and  conflicts  made  the  Reformers  less 
intent  on  foreign  conquests ;  and  the  bitter  fruits 
of  the  Reformation,  so  early  developed  and  matured, 
made  them^less  confident  of  its  excellence.     Thus 


342  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   TENDENCIES. 

tlio  tendencies  of  the  system  were  checked,  and  ita 
advocates  were  brought  to  reflection,  under  circum- 
stances favorable  to  a  correction  of  their  early  mis- 
takes. 

Thdi'  means  necessary  for  building  are  very  differ- 
ent from  those  employed  in  tearing  down.  Mr. 
Campbell,  in  the  commencement  of  his  Keforma- 
tioD^  was  occupied  in  demolishing  the  "kingdom  of 
the  clergy,"  and  all  sectarian  combinations.  Every 
institution  and  every  means,  therefore,  used  in  sup- 
porting and  spreading  the  prevalent  Christian  or- 
ganizations, was  condemned  as  evil.  But  when  ho 
found  himself  at  the  head  of  a  sect,  he  felt  the 
necessity  of  resorting  to  the  use  of  these  condemn- 
ed measures  for  the  purpose  of  consolidating  and 
increasing  it.  On  this  subject  it  will  be  proper  to 
enter  into  details. 

The  reader  has  seen  the  utter  contempt  in  which 
Mr.  Campbell  held  the  "  hireling  clergy."  "  Every 
man,  who  receives  money  for  preaching  the  Gospel, 
or  for  sermons,  by  the  day,  month,  or  year,  is  a  hire- 
ling in  the  language  of  truth  and  soberness."  Such 
was  the  doctrine  of  the  early j  but  it  is  not  the  doc- 
trine of  the  current  Reformation.  Now,  the  Ke- 
formed  churches  have  settled  pastors,  not  reared  up 
among  them,  but  called  from  abroad  to  officiate  in 
them,  supported  by  regular  salaries,  and  differing, 
in  no  material  respect,  from  the  ministers  of  othei 
Christian  denominations.     They  are   "  clergy,"  or 


CAMPBELLISM    IN    ITS    TENDLNCIES.  343 

"  hirelings,"  according  to  the  Bethany  definition  of 
these  terms. 

The  extravagance,  show,  and  pomp  of  city  con- 
gregations was  a  popular  theme  for  declamation 
with  the  Reformer  of  Brooke.  Many  simple  mind- 
ed and  pious  Christians  wished  him  success  in  his 
efforts  to  correct  the  evil.  Unfortunately,  the  Re- 
formed churches  are,  in  this  respect,  following  in  the 
wake  of  the  sects.  The  writer  was,  not  long  since, 
in  a  large,  beautiful  and  prosperous  city,  in  the 
West,  where  the  "  Disciples'  Meeting  House" 
rose,  in  grand  proportions,  and  towering  turrets, 
above  all  the  temples  of  the  "  Babylonians."  Nor 
is  this  a  solitary  case.  Every  where  the  advocates 
of  the  "  ancient  Gospel,"  are  vieing  with  the  de- 
votees of  a  so-called  spurious  Christianity,  in  the 
cost  and  adornment  of  their  houses  of  worship. 

Baptist  Associations — the  messengers  of  the 
churches  met  together  for  the  purposes  of  fraternal 
consultation  and  advice — were  pronounced  by  Mr. 
Campbell  to  be  unauthorized  of  God.  There  was 
no  "  Thus  saith  the  Lord"  for  them.  Chn.  Bap.,  p. 
26.  "I  hope,"  said  an  early  Reformer,  who  had 
fully  imbibed  the  spirit  of  his  master,  '•'  your  paper 
will  destroy  associations,  State  conventions, — aU  of 
which  are  as  assumed  and  as  anti-scriptural  as  the 
infallibility  and  pontificate  of  the  Pope  of  Rome." 
p.  144.  But  the  Reformed  churches  soon  felt  the 
need  of  mutual  intercourse  and  concert  in  efforta 


344  CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   TENDENCIES. 

And  Mr,  Campbell,  wlio  could  find  no  Sciipture 
authority  for  Associations,  thus  lays  down  the  law  of 
Christian  cooperation.  **  Whether  the  churches  in 
a  given  district  shall,  by  letter,  messengers,  or  stated 
meetings,  once  or  twice  per  annum,  or  oftener,  com- 
municate with  one  another  ;  whether  they  shall 
send  one,  two,  or  twenty  persons,  or  all  go  and  com- 
municate face  to  face,  or  send  a  letter ;  and  whether 
they  shall  annually  print,  write,  or  publish  their 
statistics,  &c.,  &c.,  &c.,  are  the  mere  circumstan- 
tials of  the  Christian  institution.  *  *  *  Coopera- 
tion, as  much  as  the  intercommunion  of  Christians, 
is  a  part  of  the  Christian  institution."  Chn.  Sys., 
pp.  74-75.  Associations,  it  seems,  are  unscrip- 
tural,  but  Co''>peration  meetings  are  "  a  part  of  the 
Christian  institution."  It  amounts  to  this  brief 
proposition.  What  you  do  is  wrong — if  ice  do  the 
same  thing,  and  call  it  hy  another  name,  it  is  ^ght. 
Bible  Societies  and  Sunday-Schools — schemes  of 
the  clergy — ^were,  in  Mr.  Campbell's  early  judgment, 
"  fraught  with  mischief  to  the  temporal  and  eternal 
interests  of  men."  "  I  have  for  some  time,"  said  he, 
"  viewed  both  Bible  Societies  and  Sunday-Schools,  as 
a  sort  of  recruiting  establishments,  to  fill  up  the  ranks 
of  those  sects  which  take  the  lead  in  them."  Chn. 
Bap.,  p.  80.  No  sooner,  however,  were  the  Ke- 
formed  churches  organized,  than  they  found  it 
necessary  to  resort  to  these  "  recruiting  establish- 
ments" for  the  purpose  of  filling  up  their  ranks  ; 


f 

CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   TENDENCIES.  345 

and  schemes  of  most  pernicious  tendency  when 
cherished  by  the  sects,  became  not  only  innoxious, 
but  useful  in  the  hands  of  their  new  advocates. 

Colleges-were,  in  the  early  period  of  the  Keforma- 
tioD,  plalced  among  the  marks  of  the  beast.  "  The 
Baptists,  too,"  he  said,  "  have  got  their  schools, 
their  colleges,  and  their  Gamaliels  too — and  by  the 
magic  of  these  marlts  of  tlie  beast,  they  claim  hom- 
age and  respect,  and  dispute  the  high  places  with 
those  very  Eabbis  whose  fathers  were  wont  to  grin 
at  their  fathers."  Mill.  Har.,  vol.  1,  p.  15.  In  a 
few  years  after  this  passage  was  penned,  we  see  its 
venerable  author  placed  at  the  head  of  Bethany 
College,  in  Virginia,  with  the  high-sounding  title 
of  President.  And  did  he,  &y  the  magic  of  this  marJc 
of  the  beast,  claim  homage  and  respect,  and  dispute 
the  high  places  with  the  Eabbis,  who  descended  from 
the  grinning  fathers  ?  Certainly  not.  He  has  no 
aflSnity  with  the  beast.  The  seeming  inconsistency 
is  explained  by  this  simple  consideration.  To  over- 
throw the  clergy  and  the  sects,  it  was  necessary  to 
undermine  the  influence  of  colleges ;  the  most 
effectual  way  of  destroying  their  influence  was  to 
produce  the  impression  that  they  were  marlcs  of 
the  ieas^-T-appendages  of  the  Komish  hierarchy — 
but  to  give  respect  and  influence  to  the  Reforma- 
tion, it  was  important  to  have  a  college,  free,  of 
course,  from  i^riestly  rule,  and  who  so  worthy  to 
preside  over  it  as  the  father  of  the  Reformation,  to 


346  ^CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   TENDENCIES, 

whom  belonged  tlie  honor  of  the  exhumatioi  of  the 
ancient  Gospel  ? 

To  the  education  of  the  rising  ministry,  the 
Eeformation,  in  its  early  stage,  was  most  decidedly 
hostile.  In  reviewing  a  "  Sermon  on  the  duty  of 
the  church  to  prepare  pious  youth  in  her  bosom,  for 
the  Gospel  ministry,"  in  the  year  1826,  the  editor 
of  the  Christian  Baptist  wrote  as  follows  :  p.  221, 

The  *'  sermon  is  intended  to  proclaim  that  it  is 
the  duty  of  the  church  to  prepare  in  her  bosom  pious 
youth  for  the  Gospel  ministry,  Now,  this  is  really 
a  neAv  message  from  the  skies,  for  there  is  not  one 
word,  from  Genesis  to  John,  which  says  that  it  is 
the  duty  of  the  church  to  prepare  pious  youth  for 
the  Gospel  ministry.  This  point  could  not  be 
proved  from  the  words  of  any  previous  ambassador, 
and  it  is  unnecessary  for  any  ambassador  to  prove 
his  own  communications  to  be  true." 

At  what  precise  time  it  is  not  known,  but  before 
the  beginning  of  the  year  1854,  the  "new  message 
from  the  skies"  had  been  duly  received  and  authen- 
ticated. The  "  Christian  church**  needed  an  edii- 
cated  ministry,  and  authority  to  raise  up  one  was 
easily  obtained.  In  the  January  No.  of  the  Mill. 
Harbinger,  of  the  present  year,  (1854)  Mr.  Camp- 
bell in  a  letter  addressed  to  his  wife,  says  :  p.  40. 

"  Since  I  last  wrote  to  you,  I  have  been  almost  con- 
stantly on  the  wing,  pleading  the  cause  of  man's  re- 
demption ia  the  dej"  artment  of  an  educated  ministr}^ 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   TENDENCIES.  347 

That  this  is  one  of  the  Lord's  ordinances,  cannot 
rationally  be  doubted  by  any  student  of  nature  and 
of  the  Bible.  .  .  .  We  want  not  higher  authority  to 
teach  or  to  constrain  us  to  raise  up — to  educate  and 
train  men  in  human  and  Christian  science,  that  they 
may  be  able  to  teach  others  also.  .  .  .  We  are 
pleased  to  see  that  every  form  of  Protestantism, 
Quakerism  alone  excepted,  is  intent  on  the  proper 
education  of  its  itinerant  ministry/' 

Now,  this  is  refreshing.  It  sounds  so  unlike  the 
censorious,  sterile,  and  hostile  Campbellism  with 
which  our  Noells,  and  Cloptons,  and  Semples,  had 
to  deal.  It  shows,  conclusively,  that  reformatory, 
conservative  influences  have  been  modifying  and 
improving  the  system.  Every  such  indication  of 
genuine  reformation  should  be  hailed  with  delight 
by  the  friends  of  evangelical  piety. 

The  reader  has  already  been  informed,  through 
the  extracts  transferred  from  the  writings  of  Mr. 
Campbell  to  these  pages,  of  his  views  on  the  subject 
of  Christian  missions ;  and  will,  doubtless,  be  sur- 

i*- "  prised  to  loam  that  the  Reformers,  with  Mr.  Camp- 
bell at  their  head,  have  engaged  in  the  missionary 

'  ^  enterprise.  Soon  after  their  separate  organization, 
they  sent  out,  not  missionaries j  but  evangelists 
— paid  preachers — to  proclaim  the  "  ancient  Gos- 
pel." For  the  appointment  of  missionaries,  not 
endowed  wit}i  miraculous  power,  there  could,  at 
that  time,  be  found  in  the  Scriptures ^  neither  pre- 


348  CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   TENDENCIES. 

cept,  example,  or  inferential  authority  ;  but  tliu 
appointment  and  support  of  evangelists  to  itinerate 
and  proclaim  the  "ancient  Gospel,"  was  plainly 
sanctioned  by  the  "  Living  Oracles."  But  recently 
they  have  organized  a  Foreign  Mission  Board — and 
have  sent  forth,  not  a  church,  according  to  the  ori- 
ginal Bethany  plan  for  evangelizing  the  world,  but 
individual  missionaries,  "  without  the  power  of  work- 
ing miracles,"  of  which,  said  Mr.  Campbell,  "  the 
Bible  gives  us  no  idea."     Chn.  Bap.,  p.  15. 

The  above  facts  will  suffice  to  show  the  favorable 
changes  which  have  taken  place  among  the  Reform- 
ers. The  Eeformation  has  been  gradually  and 
greatly  reformed.  The  present  Millennial  Harbin- 
ger is  a  far  more  respectable  and  dignified  monthly 
than  the  old  Christian  Baptist.  Though,  it  must 
be  conceded,  that  its  pages  occasionally  furnish 
proof  that  its  veteran  editor  has  not  forgotten  the 
art  of  vituperation.  The  Disciples  generally  are  less 
opiniated,  less  eager  for  battle,  and  far  more  cour- 
teous and  conciliatory,  in  their  intercourse  with 
other  Christians,  than  they  formerly  were.  In  short, 
they  seem  to  have  tak-en  the  road  back  to  Babylon, 
and  have  nearly  completed  their  journey. 

There  is  manifestly  a  growing  desire  among  the 
Reformers  to  be  accounted  "  evangelical,"  "  ortho- 
dox," and  "regular."  A  striking  proof  of  this 
remark,  was  furnished,  not  long  since,  in  the  city 
of  St.  Louis,  Mo.     There  was  a  Christian  Associa- 


CAMPBELLISM   IN    ITS   TENDENCIES,  349 

tion  formed  in  that  city.  The  members  of  the 
Association  were  required  to  he  members  of  some 
"  evangelical  church."  Applicants  for  admission 
from  the  Christian,  or  Keformed  church,  were  re- 
jected on  the  ground  that  they  furnished  no  evi- 
dence of  being  "  evangelical."  To  obviate  the 
difficulty,  a  prominent  member  of  the  church,  with, 
as  it  is  stated,  the  concurrence  of  the  pastor,  and 
other  leading  members,  drew  up  and  presented  a 
statement  of  the  doctrines  held  by  the  church. 
Here  follows  the  creed  : 

"  The  independent  existence  of  one  absolutely 
perfect  Being,  the  Creator,  Preserver,  and  Gov- 
ernor of  all  things  :  The  divine  inspiration,  the 
authority,  and  sufficiency  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  : 
The  existence  of  three  persons  in  the  Godhead,  the 
Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit :  the  incarna- 
tion and  Atonement  of  the  Son  for  human  salva- 
tion :  The  justification  of  the  sinner  by  faith,  without 
the  deeds  of  the  law,  or  meritorious  works  of  right- 
eousness, of  any  kind  whatever,  and  the  necessity 
of  the  Spirit's  influence  to  regenerate  the  souls  of 
men."     Western  Watchman,  vol.  6,  p.  126. 

Concerning  the  above  article  several  remarks  are 
worthy  to  be  made. 

1.  It  is  a  creed.  It  is  a  brief  summary  of  the 
doctrine  in  the  belief  of  which  the  church  is  united. 
Though  not  formall)   sanctioned  by  the  church,  it 

/ 


350  CAMrBfiLLISM   IN    ITS   TENDENCIKS. 

may  be  presumed  to  contain  the  truths  deemed  by 
them  fundamental. 

2.  It  is  a  sound  creed.  Its  orttodoxy,  so  far  as 
it  goes,  will  be  readily  admitted  by  all  evangelical 
Christians.  It  contains,  expressed  in  plain,  and 
well  understood,  but  not  exclusively  scriptural 
terms,  the  truths  vi^hich  are,  by  the  Sjjirit  of  inspi- 
ration, placed  as  the  principal  parts  of  the  Gospel 
system.  It  is  the  "  far  famed  tree  of  evangelical 
orthodoxy,"  whose  bitter  fruits  Mr.  Campbell  so 
eloquently  described.  It  was  drawn  up  and  pre- 
sented for  a  worthy  purpose — to  furnish  proof  that 
those  who  were  united  in  the  belief  and  mainten- 
ance of  its  doctrines — were  entitled  to  Christian 
confidence  and  affection. 

3.  Its  adoption  is  &  virtual  renunciation  ofCamp- 
hellism.  This  will  appear  from  several  considera- 
tions. It  applies  certain  "  scholastic"  terms,  as 
"  three  persons,"  and  "  incarnation"  to  the  Father, 
the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  contrary  to  the  ex- 
press and  imperative  law  of  the  Reformation.  "  We 
will  not  allow  him,  (the  Trinitarian,)  to  apply 
scholastic  ej)ithets  to  the  Father,"  &c.  It  sets  at 
naught  the  foundation  of  Christian  union  laid  by 
Mr.  Campbell,  and  the  Reformed  builders  generally 
— that  the  belief  of  one  fact,  and  subnaission  to 
one  institution  expressive  of  it,  "  is  all  that  is  re- 
qiured  of  Heaven  to  admission  into  the  cliurch" 
And,  lastly,  it  is  a  concession,  in  the  fa-e  of  all  Mr 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS   TENDENCIES.  351 

Campbell's  teaching,  that  a  profession  of  belief  in 
the  Scriptures  is  insuflacient'  to  indicate  a  man's 
faith, 

4.  It  is  a  mattir  oi  just  and  sincere  gratulation 
that  these  St.  Louis  Christians  have  given  a  clear 
and  manly  exhibition  of  their  religious  b  lief.  They 
owed  it  to  themselves,  to  the  Christian  Association, 
to  the  public,  and,  above  all,  to  the  truth,  and  to 
the  God  of  truth,  not  to  conceal  their  faith  under 
loose  and  indefinite  expressions,  but  to  give  it  a 
free  and  honest  utterance.  If  in  doingso  they  have 
renounced  the  distinctive  princij^les  of  the  Bethany 
Keformation,  they  may  have  the  consolation  to  re- 
flect that  they  have  followed  the  oracles  of  God. 

5.  If  the  Reformers  generally  are  prepared  to 
adopt  this  creed,  with  a  few  additions,  to  which,  it 
is  presumed,  they  have  no  serious  objection,  to  com- 
plete the  system,  there  seems  to  be  no  good  reason 
why  they  should  keep  themselves,  or  bei  kept  by 
others,  in  estrangement  from  their  brethren  of  the 
evangelical  sects.  True,  their  Reformation  would 
utterly  vanish,  except  in  dim  and  shadowy  remem- 
brance. But  what  of  that  ?  It  was  commenced, 
and  ])rosecuted,  most  unsuccessfully,  to  promote 
Christian  union — let  it  perish,  with  a  fairer  pros- 
pect of  securing  the  same  glorious  result. 

We  have  seen  tlie  vaunting  pretensions  of  Camp- 
bellisni  to  be  the  "  ancient  Gospel."  All  the  world- 
lineas,    contentions,  schisms  and  apostasies  among 


352        campbEllism  in  its  tendencies. 

tlie  sects  were  ascribed  by  its  advocates  to  C7'eedsy 
evangelical:  ortJiodoxy,  metaphysical  speculations, 
&c,  Itwas  confidently  predicted  that  the  fruits  of 
th'e;^cient  Grospel  would  be  as  far  superior  to  the 
fruits  of  the  popular  exhibitions  of  Christianity,  as 
the  grapes  of  Eshcol  were  to  the  apples  of  Sodom. 
The  experiment  has  been  made  on  a  somewhcrf;  ex- 
tended scale.     What  is  the  result  ? 

The  most  enthusiastic  admirer  of  the  system 
must  admit  that  its  fair  promises  have  not  been  ful- 
filled. The  Keformation  has  proved  a  failure.  Its 
converts  have  been  considerably  increased  ;  but  ac- 
cording to  Mr.  Campbell's  concession,  they  are  a 
heterogenious  multitude,  among  whom  "  evei^y  sort 
of  doctrine  has  been  proclaimed,  by  ahnost  all  sorts 
of  preachers."  It  will  hardly  be  maintained  that 
the  rapid  increase  of  the  Keformers  is  a  proof  of 
the  truth  of  their  system.  Campbellism  has  been 
far  outstripped  in  its  conquests  by  Mormonism.  If 
success  in  winning  converts  is  the  test  of  truth,  the 
Bethany  Reformer  must  confess  the  inspiration  of 
the  prophet  of  Nauvoo.  But  what  has  been  the 
moral  influence  of  Campbellism  .^^  Hare  the  con- 
verts made  by  the  "  ancient  Gospel"  been  preem- 
inent for  modesty,  humility,  disinterestedness,  so- 
briety of  deportment,  good  works,  stability,  and 
usefulness  ?  Comparisons  are  invidious.  They 
would  not  now  be  made,  if  they  were  not  necessary 
.  to  expose  the  fallacy  of  the  liberal  professions  of  the 


CAMPBELLISM   IN   ITS    TENDENCIES.  358 

early  Reformation.  It  may  he  confiderdly  affirmed^ 
that  experience  has  falsified  them.  The  fruits  of 
Campbellism  are  not  better  than  were  the  fruits  of 
the  Gospel  preached  by  Noell  and  Semple,  and  their 
worthy  compeers. 

K  the  Reformation  has  accomplished  any  good, 
it  is  attributable,  not  to  its  peculiarities,  but  the 
great  principles  which  it  has  inculcated,  sometimes 
with  strange  inconsistency,  in  common  with  "  evan- 
gehcal  orthodoxy."  Just  in  proportion  as  it  be- 
comes assimilated  to  evangelical  Christianity,  and 
renounces,  or  ignores,  its  distinctive  principles,  we 
may  hope  for  an  increase  of  its  usefulness. 


CONCLUSION.      V 

The  rise,  progress  and  variations — the  principlea 
discipline  and  tendencies  of  Campbellism  have  been^ 
somewhat,  carefully,  examined.  Many  imtortant 
points  have  been  passed  without  notice.  CTo  at- 
tempt the  correction  of  all  the  errors  into  which  Mr. 
Campbell  has  fallen,  would  involve  the  necessity  of 
a  minute  review  of  all  the  ponderous  volumes  which 
he  has  written.  Scarcely  a  page  of  his  writings  is 
free  from  false  logic,  false  philosophy,  or  false  theol- 
ogy, to  say  nothing  of  philological,  grammatical  and 
rhetorical  blemishes.  But  the  writer  has  deemed 
it  proper,  so  far  as  he  has  discussed  the  evils  of 
Campbellism,  to  confine  his  remarks  to  its  graver 
errors.  It  is  suitable,  in  conclusion,  to  ofTer  a  few 
general  remarks  on  the  whole  system. 

The  Examination  of  the  subject  must  tend  greatly 
to  strengthen  the  conviction  that  the  system  of 
truth,  generally  designated  among  Protestant  Chris- 
tians, the  "  evangelical/'  or  "  ortliodox  faith,"  is 
Scriptural.  When  Mr.  Campbell  was  attacking  it, 
with  so  much  learning    ingenuity^  and  diligence, 


CONCLUSION.  355 

many  feared  that  it  would  be  overthrown.  The  fear 
was  idle.  To  suppose  that  the  essential  principles 
of  the  Gospel  had  been  for  ages  concealed,  until 
they  were  brought  to  light,  "  in  the  year  of  grace, 
one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  twenty-three," 
was  a  grand  absurdity.  Under  a  spiritual  despot- 
ism, where  wealth,  learning,  ambition,  and  interest 
are  enlisted  to  maintain  the  existing  hierarchy,  and 
to  repress  and  crush  the  spirit  of  inquiry  and  inno- 
vation, ignorance  and  error  may  be  perpetuated. 
This  remark  explains  the  uniformity  of  error  pre- 
vailing under  the  unbroken  reign  of  "  the  man  of 
sin."  But  where  men  enjoy  freedom  to  read  and 
study,  to  teach  and  practice,  the  Word  of  God,  with 
ample  means  to  investigate  its  import,  it  seems  in- 
credible that  its  fundamental  principles  should  re- 
main unknown.  That  the  Protestant  Reformation, 
in  a  good  degree,  freed  the  human  mind  from  spirit- 
ual bondage,  and  stimulated  it  to  vigorous  and  per- 
severing eflforts  after  truth,  will  scarcely  be  denied. 
Though  some  Protestant  governments  have  imposed 
needless  and  injurious  restrictions  on  religious  in- 
quiry, others  have  tolerated,  protected  and  encour- 
aged it.  Many  men,  eminent  for  their  piety,  genius, 
learning,  candor,  and  industry — men  as  good,  and 
as  great  as  the  world  has  seen,  or  is  likely  to  see — 
availing  themselves  of  this  liberty,  have  devoted 
their  lives,  under  circumstances  favorable  to  success, 
to  the  study  :>{  the  Bible,  and  have  been  willing  to 


356  CONCLUSION. 

peril  and  sacrifice  all  worldly  advantages  in  tho 
maintenance  of  its  truths.  That  not  one  of  them 
should  have  discovered  the  essential  principles  of 
the  Gospel,  until  it  was  disinterred  by  Mr.  Camp- 
bell of  Bethany,  is  preposterous.  Whence  arose 
the  difficulty  of  understanding  the  system  ?  From 
its  obscurity.?  This  will  scarcely  be  pretended. 
From  want  of  candor,  learning  and  industry  in  the 
inquirers.?  This,  surely,  will  not  be  affirmed  by 
one  who  has  been  so  deeply  indebted  as  Mr.  Camp- 
bell, to  his  predecessors  for  his  parade  of  learning 
and  criticisms.  It  is  pleasing  to  the  pious  mind  to 
reflect,  how  the  good  and  great,  in  every  age  and 
land,  who  have  made  the  Scriptures  their  study  and 
guide,  have  harmonized  in  their  \'iews  of  the  essen- 
tial facts,  doctrines,  and  duties  of  Christianity. 
Divided  they  have  been  concerning  ordinances, 
church  polity,  and  various  speculations,  but  united 
in  all  that  pertains  to  the  vital  principles — the  soul- 
saving  truths — of  the  system.  That  any  man  should 
imagine,  after  so  many  gifted  minds  had  carefully, 
laboriously,  and  with  much  prayer,  studied  the 
Bible,  that  he  should  be  the  first,  in  many  genera- 
tions, to  discern  its  hidden  import,  and  open  it,  in 
all  its  beauty,  fulness  and  glory,  to  the  admiring 
gaze  of  mankind,  savors  more  of  vanity  than  of  a 
sound  judgment — resembles  more  the  hallucination 
of  a  distempered  mind,  than  the  dictate  of  sound 
Christian  philosophy.     The  system  of  faith,  held  by 


CONCLUSION.  357 

evangelical  Christians,  is  impregnable.  It  has  with- 
stood, and  it  is  destined  to  withstand,  the  assaults 
of  the  most  powerful,  and  the  machinations  of  the 
most  subtle,  minds.  All  hope  of  any  new  and  im- 
portant discoveries  in  the  system  is  visionary.  Chris- 
tianity does  not  belong  to  the  progressive  sci^ces. 
Its  primary  facts,  principles,  and  duties  were  plainly 
revealed,  and  fully  confirmed  in  the  beginning  ;  and 
could  be  understood  just  as  easily  and  clearly  before 
the  first  number  of  the  Christian  Baptist  appeared, 
as  they  can  be  now.  It  would  be  difficult  for  the 
most  devoted  admirer  of  Mr.  Campbell  to  point  to 
a  single  essential  principle  or  duty  of  the  Christian 
system,  which  he  has  disinterred,  or  on  which  he  has 
shed  any  fresh  light.  If  all  his  criticisms,  argu- 
ments, illustrations,  and  declamations  were  struck 
from  existence,  there  would  not  be  one  particle  less 
of  religious  light  in  the  world.  The  Bible  would 
shine  with  undiminished  lustre.  The  host  of  evan- 
gelical authors,  who  shone  in  the  religious  firma- 
ment, before  the  dawn  of  the  Bethany  Reformation, 
have  retained  their  places,  and  their  brilliance. 
After  having  pronounced  the  fruits  of  the  "  far 
famed  tree  of  evangelical  orthodoxy"  to  be  spurious 
and  pernicious,  and  having  labored,  with  all  his 
powers,  and  with  untiring  diligence,  for  almost 
thirty  years,  to  uproot  and  destroy  it,  Mr.  Campbell 
is,  at  length,  constrained  to  come  forward  and  claim 
the  honor  o    being  orthodox.     He  has  become,  it 


358  CONCLTJSIOIT. 

seems,  a  "  regular."  The  history  of  this  Keforma- 
tion  furnishes  a  most  illustrious  proof  of  the  truth, 
stability  and  excellence  of  "  evangelical  orthodoxy." 
It  has  undergone  a  fiery  ordeal.  Learning,  inge- 
nuity, wit  and  zeal,  with  all  the  weapons  that  proud 
rationalism,  and  scoffing  infidelity,  could  furnish, 
have  been  employed  for  its  overthrow,  and  employed 
with  a  signal  want  of  success.  Every  distinctive 
principle  of  the  popular  evangelical  system,  as  main- 
tained by  the  Presbyterian,  Methodist,  Baptist  and 
other  orthodox  Christian  denominations,  has  been 
unscathed.  The  doctrines  of  hereditary  human  de- 
pravity— (denied  by  some  of  the  Keformers) — of  the 
necessity  of  the  influence  of  the  Spirit  to  renovate 
the  soul  of  man — and  of  justification  by  faith,  with- 
out any  necessary  connexion  with  the  act  of  baptism 
— (which  have  been  denied,  or  understood  to  be  de- 
nied, by  all  the  Keformers) —  have  firmly  main- 
tained their  ground.  Like  some  tall  and  hoary  cliff, 
against  which  the  mighty  waves  of  the  ocean  have 
dashed,  and  foamed,  and  raged  for  a  time,  and  to 
whose  strength  they  have  at  last  rendered  homage, 
by  subsiding  into  a  comparative  calm  at  its  base, 
the  evangelical  faith,  "  the  popular  exhibition  of 
Christianity,"  has  received  and  resisted  the  threat- 
ening surges  of  the  "  current  Keformation,"  until 
their  force  is  spent,  and  their  receding  fury  pro- 
claims its  stability.  Commencing  its  assaults  on  all 
Christian  denominations  with  dauntless  intrepidity. 


CONCLUSION.  369 

and  giving  strong  assurances  of  their  eaily  overthrow, 
and  the  speedy  dawn  of  the  Millennium,  the  Eefor- 
mation  has  been  frittered  away  to  nothing,  or  haa 
ended  in  a  huge  mass  of  inconsistencies  and  contra- 
dictions., 

The  course  which  the  Baptists  should  pursue  re- 
lative to  the  Reformers,  is  worthy  of  the  gravest 
and  most  candid  consideration.  The  propriety  of 
their  action  in  separating  the  Campbellites  from 
their  communion  has  been  already  discussed.  Much 
as  the  necessity  of  the  measure  was  deplored,  by  the 
conservative  portion  of  the  Baptist  churches,  time 
has  clearly  demonstrated  its  wisdom.  There  is  now 
far  greater  harmony  of  views,  and  far  less  ahenation 
of  feeling,  between  the  Baptists  and  Reformers,  than 
there  was  previously  to  their  separation.  But  still 
the  question  comes  up,  with  augmented' interest 
and  importance,  How  shall  we  act  towards  the  Re- 
formers ? 

The  union  of  all  Christians,  so  far  as  it  can  be 
securGd  without  sacrificing  the  claims  of  an  enlight- 
ened conscience,  or  giving  countenance  to  pernicious 
error,  is  greatly  to  be  desired.  It  is  the  duty  of 
every  believer  in  Christ,  not  only  to  pray  for  this 
consummation,  but  by  the  cultivation  of  a  candid, 
kind  and  forbearing  spirit,  to  endeavor  to  promote 
it.  The  Reformers  belong  to  the  Baptist  family, 
though,  in  our  view,  they  are  an  erring  branch  of  it. 
They  agree  with  us  on  the  action  and  subjects  of 


360  CONCLUSION. 

Christian  baptism,  however  widely  they  may  diflfei 
from  us  on  other  points  ;  and  it  is  to  be  regretted 
that  those  who  substantially  concur  in  regard  to 
church  organization  and  ordinances  should  be  divided 
in  their  aiFections  and  efforts.  The  principles  which 
we  hold  in  common  have  sufficient  opposition  to  en- 
counter from  without,  to  make  it  exceedingly  im- 
portant not  to  weaken  their  influence,  and  retard 
their  progress  by  discord  and  strife  among  ourselves. 
Union,  however,  valuable  as  it  is,  may  be  purchased 
at  too  high  a  price.  A  professional  union,  founded 
on  a  common  use  of  words  and  phrases,  to  which 
we  attach  no  meaning,  or  widely  different  meaningSj^ 
or  on  a  mutual  agreement  to  conceal  the  truth,  is 
neither  Scriptural,  reasonable,  nor  desirable.  Fel- 
lowship in  the  Gospel — the  only  intelligent,  hearty 
and  efficient  union  of  Christians — implies  an  agree- 
ment in  the  essential  facts,  principles  and  duties^  of 
the  system.  And  this  fellowship  cannot  be  secured 
by  unscrupulous  compromises,  and  Jesuitical  pro- 
fessions, but  only  by  unity  of  views  concerning 
Christian  doctrine. 

How  far  error  may  be  tolerated  by  a  church  of 
Christ  for  the  sake  of  union,  it  is  not  easy  to  decide. 
The  Bible  furnishes  no  direct  and  explicit  answer 
to  the  question.  Error  may  be  so  palpable  and 
gross,  call  it  faith  or  opinion,  as  to  preclude  the 
possibility  of  its  toleration  by  a  church,  without  a 
dereliction  o''  duty,  and  a  virtual  abandonment  of 


CONCLUSION.  361 

the  cause  of  truth.  Whether  the  Refoimers  hold 
religious  views  incompatible  with  theii'  reception 
into  evangelical  'Baptist  churches,  is  the  practical 
question.  So  far  as  the  Disciples  are  affiliated 
with  the  Stonites,  or  Arians  of  the  West,  their  re- 
ception into  the  fellowship  of  our  churches  would 
be,  on  our  part,  base  unfaithfulness  to  the  cause  of 
Christ,  and  of  truth.  Nor  would  the  evil  be,  in 
any  degree,  mitigated  by  their  hypocritical  consent 
to  conceal  their  errors,  or  express  them  in  Scriptural 
phrases,  to  which  they  have  attached,  and  are  un- 
derstood to  attach  a  false  meaning.  Without  con- 
demning and  renouncing  their  error,  they  can  have 
no  Scriptural  fellowship  with  those  who  understand 
and  love  the  Gospel.  How  far  this  heterodoxy  now 
prevails  among  the  Reformers,  the  writer  does  not 
possess  the  means  of  deciding. 

It  would  not  be  difficult  from  the  writings  of  Mr. 
Campbell  to  draw  up  a  creed,  which  in  all  essential 
points  would  be  acceptable  to  evangelical  Christen- 
dom, In  this  chiefly  lies  the  danger  of  Campbellism. 
Thousands  of  persons  have  been  seduced  into  the 
belief  that  the  Reformers  differ  nothing  from  the 
Baptists,  except  in  weekly  communion,  and  othei 
unimportant  points. 

But  the  reader  has  seen  that  Camjjbellism  has 
two  sides — an  orthodox  and  a  heterodox — an  evan- 
gelical, and,  for  lack  of  a  better  term,  it  must  be 
said,  a  Refonned  side.     It  would  be  quite  easy  to 


362  CONCLUSION. 

select  from  Mr,  CampbeH's  books,  without  any  per- 
version of  the  quotations,  a  system  of  doctrine  so 
utterly-  at  variance  with  the  Scriptures,  and  so 
repugnant  to  the  feelings  of  pious  people,  that  it 
would  receive  the  undivided  condemnation  of  every 
evangelical  denomination. 

Now,  if  the  Beformers  would  secure  the  confi- 
dence and  affection  of  orthodox  Christians,  it  will 
not  he  sufficient  that  they  should  proclaim  their 
own  orthodoxy — as  Mr.  Campbell  has  recently  pro- 
claimed his — nor  even  to  put  forth,  in  some  intelli- 
gible form,  the  orthodox  articles  of  their  belief ;  but. 
they  must  explicitly  repudiate  the  doctrines  which 
they  have  been  supposed  to  hold,  at  variance  with 
the  evangelical  syetem.  They  may  have  been  mis- 
understood, or  misrepresented,  or  partly  misunder- 
stood, and  partly  misrepresented  ;  but  the  effect  in 
preventing  Christian  union  is  precisely  the  same,  as 
if  they  had  been  rightly  undei-stood,  and  rightly 
represented.  But  while  it  may  be  conceded,  that 
their  views  and  intentions  may  have  been  miscon- 
ceived, it  must  be  maintained  that  their  language 
has  been  candidly  and  fairly  interpreted.  But  if 
they  have  been  misunderstood  or  misrepresented, 
from  no  matter  what  motives,  they  owe  it  to  them- 
selves, their  Christian  brethren,  and  their  Redeemer, 
to  place  themselves  rectus  in  curia  ;  and  this  cannot 
be  done,  either  to  the  confusion  of  their  foes,  or  the 
satisfaction  of  intelligent,  inquirmg  Christians,  but 
3' 


CONCLUSION.  363 

by  a  distinct  and  formal  repudiation  of  the  hetero- 
dox sentiments  which  they  are  charged  with  having 
published. 

It  is  proper  to  descend  to  particulars.  If  the 
Eeformers  would  secure  for  themselves  the  confi- 
dence and  afi'ection  of  the  great  evangelical  family 
of  Christians,  let  them  explicitly  disavow — 

First.  That  all  the  converting  power  of  the  Spirit 
is  in  the  Word — in  the  sense  in  which  ninety-nine 
persons  out  of  every  one  hundred  unc^erstand  the 
language,  and,  indeed,  in  the  only  sense  of  which  it 
is  fairly  susceptible. 

Secondly.  That  regeneration,  the  new  birth,  and 
conversion,are  identical  with  baptism,in  the  language 
of  Scripture,  or  common  sense,  or  any  other  except 
that  of  superstition.  And  let  them  unequivocally 
maintain — 

Thirdly.  That  prayer  is  the  plain  and  imperative 
duty  of  believers,  whether  baptized  or  not. 

Fourthly.  That  repentance,  faith,  and  baptism, 
are  not  equally  essential  to  the  remission  of  sins  ; 
but  that  this  blessing  is  virtually,  really  obtained 
by  faith  in  Christ,  and  only  formally  and  declara- 
tively  in  baptism.     And, 

Fifthly.  That  the  belief  of  one  fact,  and  perform 
ance  of  one  act,  with  a  moral  life,  is  not  a  sufficient 
foundation  for  Christian  union  ;  but  that  this  union, 
to  be  Scriptural  and  valuable,  must  be  based  on  the 


364  CONCLUSION. 

belief  of  the  fundamental  facts  and  doctrines  oi  the 
Gospel. 

It  may  be  necessary  for  the  Eeformers  to  disavow 
other  sentiments  "which  they  have  maintained, 
or  which,  from  their  associations,  they  have  been 
suspected  of  holding  ;  but  the  above  principles  hav- 
ing been  clearly  and  repeatedly  proclaimed,  and 
made  the  very  ground-work  of  the  Keformation, 
must  be  repudiated,  before  they  can  reasonably  hope 
to  be  admitted  into  the  evangelical  family. 

This  renunciation  of  the  errors  of  Campbellism, 
in  order  to  secure  the  proposed  end,  must  be  made, 
not  in  a  fugitive  essay,  nor  in  equivocal  terms,  nor 
on  individual  responsibility,  but  in  some  explicit, 
formal,  solemn,  and  authorized  manner — like  the 
"declaration  of  belief  presented  by  the  Brush  Run 
church  to  the  Redstone  Association,  or  the  summary 
of  doctrine  drawn  up  by  the  Christian  church,  in 
St.  Louis,  to  convince  the  Christian  Association  of 
the  validity  of  their  claim  to  be  considered  "  evan- 
g^cal." 

For  his  indiscriminate,  violent,  and  bitter  attack 
on  their  cherished  principles,  on  their  institutions 
for  diffusing  the  light  of  the  Gospel,  and  on  their 
well-meant  efforts  to  meliorate  the  condition  of 
men,  and  display  the  glory  of  Christ,  Mr.  Campbell 
owes  an  apology  to  the  Christian  world.  Especially 
is  this  due,  as  he  found  it  expedient,  in  building  up 
the  "  Christian  church"  that  is,  his  own  party,  to 


CONCLUSION.  365 

employ  the  same  institutions,  and  the  same  means, 
for  the  use  of  which  he  so  freely  censured  them. 
Though  this  apology  may  not  be  essential  to  the 
restoration  of  harmony  between  the  Baptists  and 
Reformers,  it  is  indispensable  to  the  restoration  of 
Christian  confidence  in  the  leader  of  the  Reformation. 

Some  concessions,  too,  may  be  due  on  the  part  of 
the  Baptists,  to  secure  the  desired  union.  They 
have  occasionally  evinced,  in  their  contests  with 
the  Reformers,  an  acrimony,  seeming  to  spring  from 
personal  dislike,  rather  than  zeal  for  the  truth  and 
honor  of  God,  which  they  should  readily  admit,  and, 
in  future,  carefully  avoid. 

The  regular  meeting  of  all  the  churches,  in  their 
respective  places  of  worship,  on  every  Lord's-day, 
which  the  Baptists  have  never  opposed,  they  should 
more  earnestly  insist  on,  and  more  faithfully  practice. 
Weekly  communion  they  should  not  contend  about, 
but  let  it  be  introduced  into  the  churches  wherever, 
and  whenever  it  is  deemed  obligatory  or  expedient. 
They  should  not  yield  to  the  Reformers,  as  in  truth 
they  do  not,  in  their  reverence  for,  their  submission 
to,  and  their  diligent  study  of,  the  holy  Scriptures. 

As  to  the  name  by  which  they  shall  be  called, 
neither  the  Baptists  nor  the  Reformers  should  bo 
much  concerned.  The  Disciples  of  Christ  were  not 
called  Christians  until  eleven  years  after  his  ascen- 
sion ;  and  then,  whether  the  name  was  given  by  the 
Spirit  of  inspiration,  assumed  by  them  in  honor  of 


CONCLUSION. 

tlieii  Master,  as  a  matter  of  expediency,  or  adoj/ted 
by  tleir  enemies  as  a  term  of  reproach,  the  sacred 
historian  has  not  informed  us,  and  we  can  only  con- 
jecture. We  should  be  solicitous  about  truth  and 
•piety,  not  names.  The  name  Baptist,  it  is  presumed, 
was  not  assumed  by  those  who  bear  it,  after  deliber- 
ation, and  of  choice,  nor  would  it  be  practicable  for 
them,  at  their  option,  to  lay  it  aside.  The  appel- 
lation Christian,  can  never,  in  the  present  divided 
state  of  the  religious  world,  be  employed  to  desig- 
nate, without  a  qualifying  epithet,  any  particular 
party  of  Christians.  But  if  we  see  eye  to  eye,  speak 
the  same  things,  and  are  animated  by  the  same 
epirit,  whether  we  are  called  Baptists,  Keformers, 
or  Christians,  or  are  distinguished  by  some  other 
name,  is  of  little  consequence.  The  primitive 
Christians  were  equally  pious,  happy,  and  useful, 
whether  they  were  called  Galileans,  Disciples,  or 
Christians.  Our  fathers  ecclesiastic,  were  not  less 
worthy  when  they  were  known  as  "  Ana-baptists," 
than  their  descendants  to  whom  has  been  accorded 
the  name  of  Baptists. 

Is  there  any  prospect  of  the  consummation  of 
Buch  a  union  as  has  been  briefly  sketched  ?  None, 
it  is  to  be  feared,  during  the  life-time  of  Mr.  Camp- 
bell. The  frequent  changes  of  his  religious  views, 
have  induced  a  general  lack  of  confidence  in  his 
stability.  His  manifold  inconsistencies,  and  contra- 
dictions, have  awakened,  in  many  minds,  a  suspicion 


CONCLUSION.  367 

as  to  the  integrity  of  his  purposes.  In  the  coiL*se  of 
the  thirty  years'  conflict  between  the  Eeformers  and 
Baptists,  many  distinguished  combatants,  whether 
justly  or  unjustly,  is  not  material,  have  deemed 
themselves  unfairly,  unkindly,  or  rudely  treated  by 
Mr.  Campbell  ;  while  he,  doubtless,  has  against 
them  a  list  of  grievances,  equally  long  and  grave,  to 
be  redressed.  Beside  all  these  things,  having  for 
more  than  a  quarter  of  a  century,  been  the  man 
of  his  party,  it  is  not  reasonable  to  expect  that 
he  would  consent  to  unite  himself  with  a  deno- 
mination in  which,  though  he  might  occupy  a  pro- 
minent place,  he  could  not  occupy  the  position  of 
leader.  In  addition  to  these  obstacles,  it  will  require 
no  small  measure  of  humility  and  moral  heroism  in 
him,  to  acknowledge  that  his  Keformation  has  proved 
a  failure,  and  that  his  views  are  in  substantial  agree- 
ment with  those  of  the  sects  against  whom  he  has 
80  long  and  fiercely  warred.  All  these  matters 
considered,  there,  is  very  little  ground  to  hope  that, 
in  the  life-time  of  the  Keformer,  and  with  his 
approbation,  such  a  union  between  the  Keformers 
and  Baptists  will  be  effected,  as  truth,  piety,  and 
Christian  cooperation  demand. 

Still  there  is  ground  to  hope  for  the  ultimate 
scriptural  and  cordial  union  of  these  parties.  The 
work  of  assimilation  between  them  is  going  on,  and 
it  will  go  on,  with  increasing  rapidity,  as  the  original 


368  CONCLUSION. 

causes  of  irritation  are  left  behind  and  forgotten, 
and  the  veterans  in  the  strife,  gradually  quit  the 
battle-field.  In  many  places  Campbellism  has  lost 
its  pugnacity,  and  is  fast  losing  its  distinctive 
elements,  and  receiving  a  new  impression  from  the 
religious  principles  with  which  it  is  ceaselessly 
coming  in  contact.  The  Baptists,  too,  it  must  be 
admitted,  are  not  precisely  what  they 'would  have 
been,  had  there  been  no  Reformation.  They  have 
not  been  uninterested  spectators  of  the  religious 
convulsions  and  changes  around  them.  While  they 
have  seen  no  cause  to  abandon  any  of  their  distinc- 
tive principles,  or  practices,  they  have  corrected 
many  of  their  mistakes,  burnished  their  armor,  and 
learning  wisdom  alike  from  the  successes  and  fail- 
ures of  their  opponents,  have  prepared  themselves 
for  concerted,  vigorous  and  determined  efforts  in 
support  of  what  they  deem  the  causfLof  truth,  and 
of  Christ.  Let  the  process  of  assimilation  go  on. 
Good  men  should  earnestly  pray  for.  its  progress. 
All  should  aim  to  promote  it  by  an  honest,  earnest 
adherence  to  the  teaching  of  the  Scriptures,  by 
diffusing  the  light  of  truth,  and,  above  all,  by  cul- 
tivating the  spirit  of  the  Eedeemer — the  spirit  of 
love,  gentleness,  meekness,  and  candor. 

But  until  this  union  can  be  scripturally,  and  with 
the  concurrence  of  the  churches,  consummated,  it 
becomes  the  Baptists  to  pursue  a  firm,  straight- 


(JONCiusiON.  369 

fonvard,  but  coaciliating  course,  receiving  no  Ee- 
forrner  into  their  fellowship  without  a  distinct  re- 
nunciation on  his  part  of  the  peculiar  principles  of 
Oamphellism,  and  a  clear  assent  to  the  fundamen- 
tal doctrines  of  the  evangelical  system,  for  whicL 
we  have  so  long  and  faithfully  contended. 


/ 


t 


«»• 


CAMPBELLISM  RE-EXAMINED. 


BY 


JEREMIAH  B.  JETER, 


OF    KICHMOND,    VlRaiNIA. 


NEW-YORK  : 

SHKLDON,  BLAKEMAN  <fc  CO. 

CHICAGO  :    8.  C.  ORIOGS  k  CO. CHARLESTON  :    SMITH  ft  WHrLOEK. 

NASHVILLE:     TOOX, NELSON  k  CO.,  AXO  ORAVES,  MARKS  ft 

ROTLAND. CINCINNATI:     APPLEOATE    ft   CO. 

RICHMOND:    CHARLES  WORTUAM.     . 


./ 


CAMPBELLISM  RE-EXAMINED. 

Soon  after  my  work,  Campbellism  Examined,  was 
published,  Mr.  Campbell  commenced  a  review  of  it 
in  the  Millennial  Harbinger.  He  was  thankful  to 
the  "  ten  worthy  brethren,"  who  had  called  me  out 
to  examine  "  something  nicknamed  Campbellism," 
as  it  would  afford  him  an  opportunity  of  extending 
the  empire  of  this  sometliing  "  over  myriads  of  new 
readers,  thinkers  and  actors,  in  the  grand  ecclesi- 
astic drama  of  the  nineteenth  century."  But  thank- 
ful as  he  was  to  them,  he  could  be  thankful  to 
them  no  more,  if,  after  reading  his  review  of  the 
book,  they  should  "  yet  sanction  or  commend  it,  or 
print  and  circulate  it  through  this  community." 
Such  was  the  boasting  with  which  he  began  his  re- 
view. Soon,  however,  seemingly  dissatisfied  with 
the  results  of  his  labor,  he  proposed  to  engage,  in 
an  oral  or  newspaper  discussion,  of  the  points  at 
issue  between  us.  As  I  declined  this  proposal,  he 
resolved,  with  increased  earnestness,  to  concentrate 
his  attention  on  my  book,  and  to  continue  his  "  ex- 
positions of  its  errors  and  misrepresentations,"  until 
he  shoula  do  me  "  ample  justice." 


4  CAMPBELLISM   EE-EXAMINED. 

It  is  now  time  to  inquire  in  what  manner  Mr.  C. 
has  redeemed  his  pledge.  He  has  published  nine 
pretty  long  numbers  of  the  review,  with  other  arti- 
cles designed,  either  directly  or  indirectly,  to  expose 
the  alleged  errors  of  Campbellism  Examined.  These 
pieces  are  made  up  of  a  few  petty,  verbal  criticisms, 
many  offensive  personalities,  a  huge  mass  of  irrele- 
vant matter,  much  empty  declamation,  frequent 
repetitions,  and  a  most  desultory  discussion  of  some 
of  the  positions  maintained  in  my  book.  K"o  state- 
ment has  been  invalidated,  no  quotation  shown  to 
be  unfair,  and  no  argument  manfully  and  logically 
met.  The  work  remains  intact.  Allowing  all  the 
reviewer's  arguments  to  be  valid,  which  I  am  very 
far  from  doing,  the  force  and  importance  of  the 
volume  would  be  but  little  diminished,  the  greater 
portion  of  it  having  received  little  or  no  attention. 
The  most  devoted  friends  of  the  reformation,  and 
the  warmest  admirers  of  Mr.  C,  must  admit  that 
the  review,  and  its  kindred  articles,  are  not  a  satis- 
factory reply  to  my  book.  They  furnish  its  conclu- 
sive defence.  Mr.  0.  himself  must  have  a  painful 
consciousness  that  he  has  utterly  failed  to  meet  its 
statements  and  reasonings.  His  conviction  finds 
utterance  in  the  last  number  of  the  review.  "  But 
the  half  of  the  sophistry  and  of  the  ad  captandum 
rhetoric  of  this  ill-fated  book,  has  not  yet  been  de- 
veloped. Indeed,  the  broken  and  desultory  man- 
ner in  which  we  have  hitherto  noticed  4^,  inter- 


CAMPBELLISM   RE-EXAMINED.  5 

ris  ted,  as  we  always  are,  and  have  been,  in  maldng 
provision  for  numerous  and  various  topics,  (alwaya 
on  hand  for  a  monthly  periodical,)  to  say  nothing 
of  all  the  other  duties  of  life  incumbent  upon  us  in 
our  various  relations  to  society,  is  by  no  means  pro- 
pitious to  a  luminous,  connected,  compact,  and  vig- 
orous exposition  of  its  leading  perversions,  miscon- 
ceptions, and  consequent  misrepresentations  of  not 
only  the  special  subjects  on  which  it  treats,  but  of 
all  related  to  them.  We  cannot  do  the  subject 
justice  in  our  present  method  of  reviewing  it." — 
Page  553.  A  pretty  candid  confession  this,  that 
the  review,  begun  with  such  high  hopes  and  vaunt- 
ing promises,  has  proved  a  failure.  For  aught  that 
has  yet  appeared,  the  "ten  worthy  brethren"  at 
whose  request  the  book  was  written,  should  not 
forfeit  all  claim  to  Mr.  Campbell's  gratitude,  if  they 
still  continue  to  "  sanction  or  commend  it,  or  print 
and  circulate  it  through  this  community." 

What  will  Mr.  0.  next  do  ?  With  the  laurels, 
won  in  many  a  well-contested  field,  still  fresh  on 
his  brow,  he  cannot  be  expected  to  retire  thus  from 
the  combat.  Something  must  be  done  to  meet  the 
exigency.  In  the  eighth  number  of  the  review,  he 
writes — "  But  I  cannot  waste  time  in  reasoning 
against  positions  so  palpably  false  and  so  suicidal, 
as  not  a  few  of  my  friend  Jeter's  assumptions  and 
positions  are.  Some  are  demanding  of  me  a  book 
on  the  subject,  but  really  I  do  not  think  it  worthy 


5  CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED. 

of  a  book." — p.  456.  This  was  the  deliberate  and 
recorded  judgment  of  Mr.  C.  In  the  next  No., 
he  says,  *'  I  purpose  to  suspend  my  review  for  some 
two  or  three  months,  and,  in  pursuance  of  the  re- 
quests on  hand,  I  will  give  a  book  for  a  book,  and 
a  line  for  a  line  ;  at  the  same  price  at  which  Dr. 
Jeter's  book  is  sold  and  circulated  by  the  anti-re- 
visionist Baptists." — pp  553-4.  So  it  seems  that 
my  work,  though  unworthy  of  such  an  honor,  is  to 
have  a  reply  from  the  pen  of  Mr.  C,  in  the  form 
of  a  book,  corresponding  with  itself  in  cost  and 
size. 

I  should  postpone  any  notice  of  the  review  until 
the  appearance  of  the  promised  book,  but  for  two 
reasons  :  First — I  much  doubt  whether  it  will  ever 
be  published.  As  my  work  is  unworthy  of  an  ex- 
tended reply,  Mr.  C.  is  not  likely,  amid  his  multi- 
plied and  important  engagements,  to  find  time  to 
prepare  it.  Secondly — If  he  should  write  a  book, 
I  am  desirous  that  it  may  be  as  free  as  possible 
from  errors  ;  and  I  wish,  by  pointing  out  some  of 
the  mistakes  of  the  review,  to  afford  him  an  oppor- 
tunity of  correcting  them.  I  shall  do  little  more 
than  furnish  hints  for  his  guidance. 

PERSONALITIES. 

It  is  a  great  pity  that  religious  controversy,  in 
itself  adapted  to  promote  the  interests  of  truth  and 
righteousness,  should  so  frequently  degenerate  into 


CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED.  7 

bittei  personal  invective.  Mr.  C.  commenced  Lis 
review  with  the  seeming  intention  of  treating  me 
courtiously.  "  We  shall/'  he  says,  "  with  all  can- 
dor, and  with  all  attention,  concentrate  our  mind 
upon  the  efforts  of  our  respectable,  and  I  presume 
to  say,  very  estimable  friend.  Elder  J.  B.  Jeter." 
He  had  not,  however,  proceeded  far  before  he  began 
to  depreciate  my  abilities  and  my  book.  "  There 
are  not  a  few  things,"  he  says,  "  in  science,  in  learn- 
ing, and  in  religion,  which  Mr.  Jeter  will  not  un- 
derstand till  he  get  another  head  or  heart.  We 
are,  indeed,  sorry  for  his  sake,  that  we  cannot  cre- 
ate the  one  or  the  other."  "  He  has  too  recklessly 
dealt  in  assertions,  and  even,  criticisms,  for  which 
he  is  not  qualified,  either  by  nature,  by  grace,  or 
by  education."  The  review,  in  every  part,  contains 
intimations  that  Campbellism  Examined  is  a  very 
feeble  production,  and  unworthy,  except  for  its  en- 
dorsement, of  a  serious  reply. 

With  me  it  is  a  small  matter  that  my  abilities 
should  be  disparaged  by  Mr.  Campbell.  If  I  enter- 
tained a  high  estimate  of  his  judgment,  I  should 
know  that  in  this  instance  it  is  exercised  under  cir- 
cumstances not  propitious  to  a  correct  decision. 
It  demands  a  rare  measure  of  candor  and  self- 
control  to  do  full  justice  to  the  abilities  of  an  oppo- 
nent ;  and  these  are  qualities  in  which  the  intelli- 
gent readers  of  Mr.  Campbell's  works  will  perceive 
that  he  does  not  abound.     One,  however,  of  two 


8  CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED. 

conclusions  is  perfectly  clear.     Either  Mr,  C.  has 
a  consciousness  that  my  work  is  not  so  feeble  as  he 
represents  it,  or,  he  has  a  painful  conviction  of  the 
weakness  of  the  cause  which  he  advocates.     Why 
so  labored  a  defence  against  so  feeble  an  attack  ? 
Why  a  long  review,  many  other  extended  articles, 
and  then  a  book,  to  counteract  the  influence  of  mere 
"  assumptions  and  presumptions,"  however  respect- 
ably endorsed  ?     Actions  speak  more  loudly,  and 
I  may  add,  more  truly  than  words.     How  tottering 
must  be  that  cause  which  needs  to  be  so  carefully 
and  strongly  propped  under  so  slight  a  pressure.     It 
would  seem  that  the  taunt  of  Tobiah,  the  Ammon- 
ite, however  unjust  in  its  original  application,  is 
appropriate  in  the  present  case.     "  Were  a  jackal," 
according    to    Mr.    Campbell's   version — a    feeble 
assailant — "  to  go  against  the  stone  walls  which 
they  are  building" — the  incongruous,  unconnected 
doctrines  of  the  reformation — "he  would  break 
them  down." — p.  264. 

Not  confining  himself  to  the  disparagement  of 
iny  intellect  and  labors,  Mr.  C.  distinctly  charges 
me  with  misrepresentation,  garbling,  slander,  cal- 
umny, and  such  practices.  I  will  furnish  the  read- 
er with  specimens  of  his  accusations — "garbled  and 
distorted  quotations" — "  in  this  calumny,  Mr,  Jeter 
is  a  false  accuser,  unintentional ^  we  hope,  in  charity  ; 
but  unquestionably  a  false  accuser" — "  Having  been, 
and  now  being  misrepresented  by  Elder  Jeter  of 


CAMPBELLISJI    RE-EXAMINED.  9 

Richmond"  —  "None  of  my  traducers,  not  even 
Elder  Jeter  himself" —  "'judge  of  the  fidelity,  hon- 
esty, or  capacity  of  Mr.  Jeter" — "  Mr.  Jeter  is, 
knowingly  or  unknowingly,  willing  it  or  not  willing 
it,  one  of  the  most  disingenuous  and  sophistical 
writers  or  reasoners  that  I  have  noticed  in  the 
Baptist  church" — "  We  are  much  slandered  in  this 
book."  Such  are  some  of  the  epithets  by  which  I 
am  honored  in  Mr.  Campbell's  review.  These  are 
very  grave  charges  ;  and  by  what  code  of  morals 
the  reviewer  judges,  who  can  pronounce  the  author, 
against  whom  they  are  all  justly  preferred,  his 
"  very  estimable  friend,"  (p.  65,)  and  "  brother" 
(p.  71,)  I  know  not.  It  may  be  Jesuitical  or  pa- 
gan, it  certainly  is  not  Christian.  To  these  accu- 
sations, I  plead.  Not  guilty.  I  honestly  and  care- 
fully endeavored  to  furnish  in  Campbellism  Exam- 
ined a  fair  and  faithful  representation  of  Mr.  Camp- 
bell's peculiar  views.  That  I  may  have  mistaken 
nis  meaning  on  some  points  is  possible  ;  but  no 
misconceptions  have  been  pointed  out.  In  mak- 
ing quotations  from  his  works,  I  extracted  only 
what  was  pertinent  to  my  purpose,  and,  by  the 
rules  of  discussion,  I  was  required  to  do  nothing 
more.  I  now  affirm,  that  not  one  quotation  in  my 
book  bears  a  difierent  meaning  from  what  the  pas- 
sage does  in  his  works.  If  his  positions  and  argu- 
ments are  contradictory,  it  is  no  fault  of  mine  ;  nor 
should  I  bo  blamed  for  placing  ungarblod  and  fair 


10  CAMPBELLISM  RE-EXAMINED. 

extracts  from  his  writings  in  juxtaposition.  In 
Campbellism  Examined,  p.  45,  at  the  end  of  the 
8th  line  from  the  top,  the  clause,  "  until  Christians 
are  united,"  was  omitted,  whether  by  myself  in 
transcribing,  or  the  compositor  in  type-setting,  I 
cannot  tell.  This  omission  has  been  held  up,  not 
by  Ikfr.  C,  but  by  a  writer  in  the  Ch'n  Intelligencer, 
as  a  specimen  of  the  accuracy  of  my  quotations. 
The  slightest  glance  at  the  passage  must  satisfy  the 
discerning  reader  that  the  omission  does  Mr.  C.  no 
injustice,  but  weakens  my  own  argument.  It  is  the 
very  clause  that  I  should  have  italicised. 

The  charges  of  the  reviewer  are  mostly  vague 
and  general.  I  have  slandered  him,  but  in  what 
he  is  not  careful  to  show.  There  is,  however,  one 
exception  to  this  remark. — pp.  182,  183. 

"  Mr.  Jeter  is  not,  perhaps,  altogether  a  respon- 
sible writer."  Perhaps  not  !  I  am  very  reluctant 
to  be  held  responsible  for  Mr.  Campbell's  definitions 
of  my  words.  "I  would  prefer  to  inculpate  his 
head  rather  than  his  heart"  This  is  very  kind  in 
Mr.  C.  "  To  explain  myself :  While  condemning 
my  x)pposition  to  creeds,  he  uses  the  following  lan- 
guage— ^  The  term  creed,  in  its  ecclesiastic  sense, 
denotes  a  summary  of  Christian  doctrine.  There  is 
in  Christendom  a  great  variety  of  creeds,  from  the 
so-called  "Apostles'  creed,"  down  to  the  "Chris- 
tian system,"  composed  by  Mr.  Campbell  as  an  ex- 
hibition of  the  jjiinciples  of  his  Keformation.' " 


CAMPBELLISM   RE-EXAMINED.  11 

The  term  "  creed,"  from  the  Latin  "  credo,"  I 
believe  is  of  very  general  signification.  We  have 
political  an.d  philosophical,  as  well  as  religious 
creeds.  I  defined  its  ecclesiastic  sense  to  be  *'  a 
summary  of  Christian  doctrine."  It  is  defined  by 
Webster — "A  brief  summary  of  the  articles  of 
Christian  faith — a  symbol."  With  this  definition 
agrees  that  of  the  Ency.  of  Kel.  Knowledge — "  A. 
form  of  words  in  which  the  articles  of  faith  are  com- 
prehended." Right  or  wrong,  and  whether  I  am 
responsible  or  irresponsible,  this  was  my  definition 
of  the  word  "  creed."  And  to  preclude  the  possi- 
bility of  mistake,  I  affirmed,  that  "  every  intelligent 
Christian  has  a  creed,  written  or  unwritten."  In 
this  clearly,  and,  I  think,  correctly  defined  sense  of 
the  term,  creed,  I  affirmed  that  the  Christian  sys- 
tem is  Mr.  Campbell's  creed,  composed,  not  for 
adoption  in  order  to  church  fellowship,  but  as  "  an 
exhibition  of  the  principles  of  his  Reformation." 
But,  continues  Mr.  C,  "  It  is  not  a  historic factj 
that  a  summary  of  Christian  doctrine  is,  in  the  ec- 
clesiastic sense,  a  ^creed!  *  *  *  To  make  any  sum- 
mary of  doctrine  a  creed,  in  the  ecclesiastic  ^ense, 
it  must  be  submitted  to  a  person,  or  to  a  commu- 
nity, for  adoption,  in  order  to  church  fellowship,  or 
church  organization."  Mr.  C.  deliberately  sets 
aside  my  definition  of  the  word  "  creed,"  and  dog- 
matically substitutes  his  own,  and  holds  me  respon- 
sible for  it.     "  "^Ve  never  wrote,  published,  printed, 


12  CAMPBELLISM   RE-EXAMINED. 

or  proposed  for  adoption,  sucli  a  book  written  by 
myself  or  by  any  one  else."  And  who  affirmed,  or 
insinuated,  that  he  did  ?  I  asserted  that  the  Chris- 
tian System  is  Mr.  CampbeH's  creed,  composed  as 
an  exhibition  of  the  principles  of  his  Reformation; 
and  I  use  the  term  creed  in  a  sense  which  I  defined 
— a  sense  in  which  it  is  clearly  used  by,  at  least,  one 
respectable  ecclesiastical  writer,  the  editor  of  the 
Ency,  of  Religious  Knowledge.  And  says  the  Re- 
viewer, "  In  this  calumny  Mr.  Jeter  is  a  false  ac- 
cuser, unintentional,  (unintentionally,)  we  hope,  in 
charity ;  but  unquestionably  a  false  accuser." — 
Calumny  is  a  strong  word.  It  means  ^^ false  accu- 
sation of  a  crime,  or  offences  maliciously  made  or 
reported."  True,  Mr.  C.  softens  the  accusation  by 
the  charitable  hope  that  my  sin  was  unintentional 
— as  if  calumny  could  be  unintentional — and  by  the 
insinuation  that,  perhaps,  my  stupidity  renders  me 
irresponsible.  Allowing  that  Mr.  Campbell's  defi- 
nition is  right,  and  mine  is  wrong,  candor  could 
find  in  the  passage  nothing  but  the  misapplication 
of  a  term — and  one  so  carefully  explained  as  to  pre- 
clude the  slightest  possibility  of  injury  to  him,  or 
his  cause.  His  readiness  to  employ  one  of  the 
harshest  terms  of  the  language  in  censure  of  my 
statement,  proves  quite  clearly  that  he  needs  some- 
thing more  than  fair  criticism  and  sound  argument 
to  arrost  the  influence  of  my  book.  I  am  sorry  for 
Mr.  Campbell's  sake  that  he  h'^g  deemed  it  neces- 


CAMPBELLISM   RE-EXAMINED,  13 

.« 

sary  to  resort  to  such  epithets  in  his  review.  My 
book  speaks  for  itself.  Dr.  Lynd,  whom  Mr.  0. 
thanks  for  his  brief  review  of  it,  says — "  The  writer 
has  treated  the  whole  subject  with  great  candor, 
and  in  a  truly  Christian  spirit." 

VEBBAL     CRITICISM. 

The  criticism  of  words,  which  is  very  proper  in  a 
merely  literary  production,  seems  to  be  entirely  out 
of  place  in  a  grave  theological  discussion,  except  so 
far  as  it  may  be  required  to  elucidate  the  points  in 
debate  ;  but  as  Mr.  C.  has  deemed  it  necessary  to 
criticise  my  style  in  several  places,  for  no  other  ap 
parent  puq)0se  than  to  display  the  superiority  of 
his  philological  knowledge,  I  must,  reluctantly,  re 
ply  to  him. 

I  stated  that  the  "  religious  education  of  chil- 
dren, the  proper  observance  of  the  Lord's  day,  &c., 
were  too  much  neglected."  On  which  passage  the 
critic  remarks — "  There  is  but  one  word  in  this  ex- 
hibition that  is  of  doubtful  expediency,  and  that  is 
the  word  '  too^  prefixed  to  '  much.'  He  would 
seem  to  indicate  that  these  duties  might  be  much 
neglected  with  impunity,  but  they  were  too  much 
neglected.  This  is  a  grammatical  and  logical  infer- 
ence. But  in  all  candor,  I  do  not  think  that  Elder 
Jeter  intended  to  say  what  his  words  indicate.  He 
did  not  mean  that  these  six  sacred  duties  might, 
with  impunity,  be  much  neglected,  and  in  this  case 


14  CAMPBELLISM   RE-EXAMINED. 

• 

they  were  only  '  too  much'  neglected." — p.  71.  So 
important  did  this  criticism  appear  to  the  reviewer 
that  he  recurred  to  it  frequently.  This  use  of  the 
word  too  is  sanctioned  by  very  respectable  writers. 
I  recently  sa\v  it  used  in  this  manner  in  an  article 
copied  from  the  London  Times,  Coleridge,  one  of 
the  profoundest  thinkers,  and  most  polished  writers 
of  the  present  century,  says,  "  I  must  concede  to 
you  that  too  many  of  the  Pedobaptists  have  erred." 
Does  he  mean  that  error  is  harmless  in  many,  and 
only  hurtful  when  embraced  by  too  many  ?  But 
on  this  point  I  can  introduce  authority  that  must 
have  weight  with  Mr.  C.  A  writer  of  some  dis- 
tinction, whose  critical  acumen  he  will  readily 
admit,  has  furnished  examples  of  this  use  of  the 
term,  as  if  for  the  very  purpose  of  neutralizing  the 
above  criticism.  Let  the  reader  turn  over  two 
leaves  in  the  review,  and  read,  p.  75 — "  He  (Mr. 
Jeter)  is,  however,  a  very  estimable  man.  But  he 
has,  -perhaps,  too  rectlessly,  at  the  instigation  of 
some  over-excited  mere  Baptists,  undertaken  a  work 
for  which  he  is  by  no  means  pre-eminently  quali- 
fied ;  and,  too  willing  to  do  them  service,  has  too 
recklessly  dealt  in  assertions,  and  even  criticisms, 
for  which  he  is  not  qualified,  either  by  nature,  by 
grace,  or  by  education."  I  have  italicised  the  word 
too  in  this  extract.  The  reviewer  ''  would  seem  to 
indicate  that"  Mr.  Jeter  might  have  ''^recklessly 
dealt  in  assertions,  and  even  criticisms,  for  which  he 


I'AMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED.  15 

was  not  qualified  either  by  naturCj  by  grace,  or  by 
education,"  with  propriety  ;  but  unfortunately, 
"  instigated  by  over-excited  mere  Baptists"  he 
dealt  in  these  things  "  too  recklessly."  "  This  a 
grammatical  and  logical  inference.  But  in  all  can- 
dor, 1  do  not  think  that  Elder"  Campbell  "  in- 
tended to  say  what  his  words  indicate  ;"  though  my 
candor  does  not  forbid  me  to  think  that  he  was 
more  intent  to  correct  errors  in  my  style,  than  to 
avoid  them  in  his  own. 

The  reviewer  quotes  from  Campbellism  Exam- 
ined. "  The  reformation  demanded  by  the  times 
was  in  spirit  and  practice,  rather  than  doctrine." 
"  In  doctrine,  I  presume  he  means,"  adds  the  cri- 
tic. Yes,  in  doctrine — -the  sentence  is  elliptical 
— any  well-taught  school  boy  would  readily  supply 
the  ellipsis, — p.  71. 

We  shall  now  notice  a  more  important  criticism, 
pp.  550,  551. 

"  There  are  some  sentences  in  Mr.  Jeter's  book, 
and  not  a  few  of  them,  of  such  ambiguity,  that  lest 
I  should  offend  against  propriety,  I  will  merely 
quote  them,  or  pass  them  ;  such  as, 

"  '  Mr.  Campbell  and  his  friends  maintained  the 
Association,  in  its  action,  not  only  transgressed  the 
law  of  Christ,  infringed  the  religious  liberty  of  indi- 
viduals, and  were  guilty  of  flagrant  persecution, 
but  plainly  transcended  its  constitutional  authority.' 
—p.  103. 


16  CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED. 

"  This  sentence/'  continues  the  critic,  "  not  be- 
ing English,  nor  any  living  or  dead  tongue  known 
to  me,  I  pass  without  criticism.  It  is  one  of  Mr. 
Jeter's  solecisms.  Who  these  Hts'.  and  hvere'  may 
indicate,  I  presume  not  to  affirm." 

I  admit  the  fault  of  the  sentence,  but  not  the 
justice  of  the  criticism.  Association  is  a  noun  of 
multitude,  and  may,  according  to  the  rules  of  gram- 
mar, have  verbs  and  pronouns  agreeing  with  it,  in 
the  singular  or  plural  number.  But  the  number 
having  been  decided  on  should  be  retained  through- 
out the  sentence.  I  admit  the  error — either  its 
should  have  been  they,  or  were  should  have  been 
teas.  It  is  a  trivial  mistake — a  mere  over-sight — 
not  affecting,  in  the  view  of  sound  criticism,  the 
perspicuity  or  the  force  of  the  sentence.  When  the 
reviewer  affirms  that  the  sentence  is^not  "  English, 
nor  any  living  tongue"  known  to  him,  he  excites  the 
suspicion  that  something  has  disturbed  the  equilib- 
rium of  his  mind,  and  hurried  him  beyond  the 
bounds  of  fair  criticism.  Let  me  quote  a  passage' 
from  high  authority,  Review,  p.  Q5.  "  But  lue 
shall,  with  all  candor  and  with  all  attention,  con- 
centrate our  mind  upon  the  efforts  of  our  respect- 
able, and,  I  presume  to  say,  very  estimable  friend. 
Elder  J.  B.  Jeter."  I  have  ventured  to  italicise 
the  important  words  in  the  above  sentence.  Who 
are  indicated  by  "  we,"  "  our "  and  "I"  in  it  ? 
According  to  editorial  license,  the  reviewer  might 


CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED.  17 

write  ia  the  singular  or  plural  number — might  say 
either  we  or  / — but  having  selected  his  number  it 
was  inaccurate  to  depart  from  it  in  the  sentence — 
yet,  he  did  depart  from  it,  speaking  of  himself  first 
in  the  plural,  and  next  in  the  singular  number. 
Now,  I  will  not,  in  the  extravagance  of  criticism, 
affirm,  that  the  sentence  is  not  English — every 
child  would  know  better — but  I  do  affirm  that  it 
is  clearly  obnoxious  to  the  same  criticism  with  the 
sentence  so  unfairly  censured  by  Mr.  C.  Still,  I 
thank  the  critic  for  his  slight  correction  ;  and  re- 
ceive his  petty  verbal  criticisms  as  an  illustrious 
proof  of  the  general  accuracy  of  my  style. 

I  am  sorry  I  cannot  reciprocate  the  favor  which 
Mr.  Cam])bell  has  conferred  on  me  in  criticising  my 
book.  The  task  of  correcting  the  diction  of  his  re- 
view would  be  entirely  too  onerous,  as  he  will  be 
convinced  by  a  brief  specimen  of  the  labor.  I  will 
examine,  with  some  care,  the  first  eleven  lines. 

'.'We  thank  Elder  Jeter,  and  the  ten  worthy 
brethren  that  called  him  out  to  examine  something 
nicknamed 'Campbellism,'  for  the  opportunity  af- 
forded us  to  extend  its  empire  over  myriads  of  new 
readers,  thinkers  and  actors,  in  the  grand  ecclesias- 
tic drama  of  the  19th  century."  Why  does  the  re- 
viewer say  ^^ten  worthy  brethren  .5*"  There  were 
ttvelve,  and  their  names  are  printed  in  the  front  of 
the  book.  This  is,  however,  a  sbiall  mistake,  indi- 
cating merely  the  carelessness  of  the  writer.     Was 


18  CAMPBELLISM    EE-EXAMINED. 

the  "  something,  nicknamed  Campbellism/'  which 
Elder  Jeter  was  called  out  to  examine,  the  genuine 
Bethany  Reformation,  or  not  ?  I  cannot  decide. 
I  should  conclude  from  the  contem2)tuous  manner 
in  which  the  reviewer  speaks  of  it,  that  it  is  not — 
but  from  his  desire  to  extend  its  empire,  that  it  is. 
Perhaps,  he  means  that  my  examination  of  the 
spurious  article  will  increase  the  spread  of  the  gen- 
uine. Hear  the  critic  again — "  But  we  cannot 
thank  him  for  the  uncandid  and  partial  examination 
of  the  matter  which  he  has  given  ;  nor  could  we 
thank  them  if  they,  after  reading  our  review  of  it, 
will  yet  sustain  or  commend  it,  or  print  and  circulate 
it  through  this  community."  Of  circulating  a  book 
through  a  community,  I  have  a  distinct  conception  ; 
but  how  it  can  be  pri7ited  through  a  community  I 
do  not  comprehend.  And  the  learned  reviewer  in- 
forms us  that  he  shall  l\ave  no  respect  for  the  ten 
brethren,  if  they,  after  reading  his  review,  should 
continue  to  '"'  print  it  (my  book)  through  this  com- 
munity/." He  means,  doubtless  :  print  it,  and  cir- 
culate it  through  the  community — the  community, 
and  not  "this  community."  Attend  to  the  re- 
viewer once  more — "  If  I  were  not  reluctant  to  ut- 
ter a  surmize,  I  should  suppose  and  aflSrm  the  hy- 
pothesis, that  the  call  for  this  review  grows,  directly 
or  indirectly,  from  opposition  to  the  Bible  Union." 
Was  there  ever  such  a  jumble  of  incoherent  words 
from  the  pen  of  a  v^nowned  critic  !     What  autho- 


CAMPBELLISM   RE-EXAMINED.  19 

rity  has  Mr.  C.  for  his  ortliography  of  the  word 
"  surmize  ?"  There  is  none  in  its  derivation,  nor, 
so  far  as  I  know,  in  respectable  usage.  It  is  not 
so  spelt  by  Webster,  nor  Eichardson,  nor  any  of 
the  writers  quoted  by  the  latter.  I  should  con- 
clude that  the  error  was  typographical,  if  it  had 
not  been  repeated  on  p.  185.  Let  us  now  notice 
the  structure  of  the  sentence.  We  may  conceive, 
assume,  or  state  a  "hypothesis ;"  but  to  suppose  a 
hypothesis  is  precisely  equivalent  to  supposing  a 
supposition.  The  expression  "  affirm  a  hypothe- 
sis," is  a  solecism.  What  is  hypothetical  cannot 
be  affirmed — and  what  is  affirmed  is  not  hypothe- 
tical. And  yet  the  learned  reviewer  says,  "  I  should 
suppose  and  affirm  the  hypothesis."  He  does  not 
do  either  ;  and  he  tells  us  why — "  If  I  were  not 
reluctant  to  utter  a  surmize,  (then)  I  should  (both) 
suppose  and  affirm  the  hypothesis."  How  his  re- 
luctance to  utter  a  surmise  could  prevent  him  from 
affirming  anything  which  he  might  have  to  affirm, 
I  cannot  explain,  but,  perhaps,  he  can. 

Mr.  Campbell  will  perceive  that  an  attempt  to 
criticise  the  language  of  his^  extended  review  would 
involve  very  serious  labor.  He  may,  by  this  time, 
be  reminded  of  the  old  adage,  A  man  luho  lives  in 
a  glass  house  should  he  careful  not  to  throio  stones 
at  his  neighbor's  ivindoivs.  I  cannot  close  my  re- 
marks on  this  topic,  without  expressing  the  firm 
persuasion  that  the  critical  a  'cnnien  of  the  reviewer 


20  CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED. 

may  be  very  profitabl}  employed  in  revising  his  own 
works. 

THE    REVISION    OF    THE    E^^-ILISH    SCRIPTURES. 

Mr.  Campbell  has  been  exceedingly  anxious  to 
trace  "Cam pbellism  Examined"  to  the  anti-revision 
influence.  We  have  already  seen  that,  but  for  re- 
luctance "  to  utter  a  surmize/'  he  would  have  sup- 
posed and  affirmed  "  the  hypothesis  that  the  call 
for  this  (my)  review  grows,  directly  or  indirect!}', 
from  opposition  to  the  Bible  Union,"  This  hypo- 
thesis, and  truly  it  is  nothing  but  a  hypothesis, 
obtrudes  itself  into  almost  every  No.  of  Mr.  Camp- 
bell's Eeview,  It  is,  however,  quite  at  variance 
with  another  hypothesis  published  in  the  Christian 
Intelligencer,  that  I  had  been  thirty  years  in  pre- 
paring Campbellism  Examined — a  period  that  carries 
us  back  far  beyond  the  revision  movement.  But, 
why  is  Mr.  C.  so  solicitous  to  identify  my  book  with 
the  anti-revision  movement  ?  If  it  had  its  origin 
in  this  influence,  is  it  the  less  true,  the  less  im- 
jiortant,  or  the  less  entitled  to  consideration  ?  I 
understand  clearly  the  policy  of  the  reviewer.  His 
aim  is,  by  attributing  the  book  to  anti-revision  in- 
fluence, to  enlist  in  his  favor  that  large,  and  highly 
respectable  portion  of  the  Baptists  who  are  zealous- 
ly seeking  to  procure  a  corrected  version  of  the  Eng- 
lish Scriptures.  But  he  will  be  disappointed  :  they 
perceive  the  artifice. 


CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED.  21 

Of  the  designs  of  the  respected  brethren,  at  whose 
request  I  wrote  Campbellism  E^hnined,  I  know 
nothing,  except  what  I  have  learned  from  their 
note  to  me,  published  in  the  work.  Most  of  them 
are  anti-Bible  Union  men  ;  but  whether  their  op- 
position to  this  society  had  any  influence  in  dicta- 
ting their  request,  I  know  not.  One  thing  I  do 
know — I  was  not  influenced  by  opposition  to  revi- 
sion in  complying  with  the  request.  I  am  in  prin- 
cij^le  a  revisionist — have  been  made  so  by  the 
arguments  of  those  whose  measures  I  have  dis- 
approved. Though  I  do  not  co-operate  with  the 
Bible  Union,  I  am  not  prevenfRl  from  doing  so  by 
the  connexion  of  the  Reformers  with  the  Society. 
Mr,  Campbell  ought  certainly  to  feel  gratified,  that 
if  the  "  worthy  brethren/'  who  requested  me  to 
write  the  book,  were  actuated  by  hostility  to  the 
revision  enterprise,  they  were  so  utterly  defeated  in 
their  scheme.  In  composing  the  book,  I  most  sed- 
ulously endeavored  to  keep  clear  of  that  subject. 
There  is  no  mention  of  it,  no  allusion  to  it,  nothing 
•to  remind  one  of  it,  in  the  whole  work.  It  may, 
indeed,  lead  some  to  call  in  question  the  thorough- 
ness of  Mr.  Campbell's  sSlllfc'ship — his  fitness  for 
revising  the  common  version  of  the  Scriptures — but 
•%iffl;  lias  this  doubt  to  do  with  the  merits  of  the 
revision  cause  ?  One  may  surely  believe,  most  hon- 
estly, that  the  Scriptures  should  be  revised,  and 
that    ho  is  not    qualified,  by  the  ripeness  of  his 


22  CAMPBELLxSM   KE-EXAMINED. 

scholarship,  and  the  soundness  of  his  judgment  to 
revise  them,     w- 

I  have  not  quite  disposed  of  this  matter.  Tlie 
May  No.  of  the  Mill.  Har.  copies  from  the  Fiell- 
gious  Herald,  the  publishers'  notice  of  Campbell- 
ism  Examined.  After  some  remarks  on  the  notice, 
which  I  pass,  Mr.  Campbell  says  : 

"  There  is  but  one  thing  wanting,  and  that  is  the 
names  and  standing,,  moral  and  religious,  of  the 
'  several  hrethren'  of  Mr.  Jeter,  'at  whose  request' 
it  was  written. 

It  is  said  that  this  is  the  most  prudential  act  in 
the  whole  affair — tJie  concealment  of  their  names." 
p.  279. 

Why  should  the  names  of  those  brethren  be  con- 
cealed ?  They  are  all  intelligent,  resjiectable  Chris- 
tian gentlemen — most  of  them  are  ministers,  filling 
prominent  and  important  positions — and  some  of 
them  are  distinguished  for  their  learning,  abilities 
and  influence.  No  cause  needs  to  blush  at  having 
such  friends.  Their  "  standing,  moral  and  reli- 
gious," will  compare  favorably  with  that  of  any 
men,  in  any  denomination  of  Christians,  or  enlisted 
in  any  cause.  But  what  does  Mr,  Campbell  mean 
by  the  concealment  of  their  names  ?  Does  he  intend 
to  affirm  that  the  mere  omission  of  Sheldon,  Lam- 
port &  Co.,  to  publish  their  names  in  this  advertise- 
ment, was  a  concealment  of  them  ?  As  reasonably 
might  the  President  be  charged  with  concealing  the 


CAMPBELLISM   RE-EXAMINED.  23 

names  of  his  cabinet  because  h^ailed  to  mention 
them  in  his  late  message  to  Congress.     Mr.  C.  is 
too  well  acquainted  with  the  meaning  of  words  not 
to  know  that  the  mere  neglect  to  publish  is  not  con- 
cealment.    Besides,  the   passage  seems  clearly  to 
import  that  their  names  and  standing,  moral  and 
religious,  are   prudently  withheld  from  the  public. 
Those  whose  information  on  this  subject  is  derived 
wholly  from  the  pages  of  the  Mill.  Harbinger,  no 
doubt,  believe,  not  only  that  their  names  are  con- 
cealed, but  that  'a  revelation  of  their  moral  and  re- 
ligious standing  would  greatly  weaken  the  influence 
of  the   book  written  at  their  request.     And  now 
what  will  they,  and  what  will  the  reader  think, 
when  informed  that  their  names  are  published,  in 
cajiitals,  in  the  most  conspicuous  position,  in  the 
front  of  the  booh  ?     And  yet,  "  it  is  said  that  this 
is  the  most  prudential  act  in  the  whole  affair — the 
concealment  of  their  names."     By  whom  this  was 
said,  Mr.  C.  does  not  inform   us.     Perhaps,  it  was 
deemed  ^^  most  p)Yudential"  to  conceal  their  names. 
If  their    "  standing,   moral  and  religious,"   were 
known,  it  might  weaken  the  influence  of  their  sus- 
picion.    I  am  not  surprised  that  men  should  have 
been  found  weak  enough,  and  bad  enough,  to  say 
that  the  names  of  the  worthy  brethren  had  been 
concealed  from  "  prudential"  motives  ;  by  why  Mr. 
Campbell  should  have    publiscd   their   surmise,   I 
cannot  tell.     He  certainly  knew  that  their  names 


24  CAMPBELLISM    EE-EXAMINED. 

had  not  been  ojpcealed — though  he  miscounted 
them — and  that  the  book  composed  at  their  request 
could  receive  no  injury  from  a  full  revelation  of 
their  "  standing,  moral  and  religious." 

THE    BAPTIST    MINISTERS    OF    THE   PAST    GENERATION 
VINDICATED. 

It  seems  to  have  been  the  aim  of  Mr.  Campbell, 
from  the  commencement  of  his  Reformation,  to  de- 
preciate the  talents,  labors  and  usefulness  of  the 
Baptist  ministers  of  the  past  age.  Of  the  continu- 
ance of  this  aim  his  review  furnishes  abundant  evi- 
dence.    On  p,  72,  we  read — 

"  There  were  not  a  few  laymen  that  knew  more 
than  their  good  old  orthodox  preachers.  These 
preachers  disparaged  the  more  learned  ministry  of 
the  Presbyterians  and  Episcopalians,  and  claimed 
a  species  of  inspiration  and  a  special  descent  upon 
them,  or  an  immediate  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  abstract  from,  independent  of,  and  paramount 
to,  the  written  word.  They  did  not  go  for  '  hooJc  re- 
ligion,' but  for  '  Holy  Ghost  religion,'  as  they  were 
wont  to  say.  Servants  uneducated  and  in  the  corn 
fields,  and  their  masters  in  their  carriages,  with 
their  diplomas  in  their  secretaries,  were  equally  the 
subjects  of  special  visits,  special  grace,  and  special 
conversion.  They  went  to  church  once  a  month, 
and  told  their  experience  at  some  big  meeting.  It 
was  voted   to   be   orthodox  ;  they  were  immersed. 


CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED.  25 

and  had  a  joyful  season  for  a  few  days.  Is  this  ex- 
aggeration, a  fancy  sketch,  or  a'  solemn  reality  ? 
Deny  it  who  can  !  So  I  found  them  in  Kentucky 
in  1823,  and  in  Virginia  in  1825."  The  review  con- 
tains much  more  in  the  same  strain. 

What  motive  can  Mr.  C.  have  in  thus  seeking  to 
derogate  from  the  reputation  of  the  early  Baptist 
preachers  ?  The  cause  of  truth  and  piety  does  not 
demand  such  invidious  labor.  Does  he  suppose 
that  the  more  darkly  he  can  paint  the  back  ground, 
the  more  bright,  beautiful  and  prominent  will  be 
the  picture  of  his  Keformation  ?  Does  he  desire  to 
exhibit  by  contrast  with  the  old  Baptist  preachers 
the  superior  attainments  and  efficiency  of  the  pro- 
claimers  of  the  "  ancient  gospel .?"  These  Baptist 
worthies  have,  with  few  exceptions,  descended  to 
the  tomb.  Their  voices,  once  so  earnest  and  effec  - 
tive  in  beseeching  sinners  to  be  reconciled  to  God, 
they  cannot  now  employ  in  vindicating  their  prin- 
ciples, labors  and  reputation. 

It  is  not  easy  to  refute  such  loose  generalities  as 
those  contained  in  the  above  extract.  Nothing  is 
more  common,  and,  I  may  add,  more  unfair,  than 
to  censure  classes  for  the  defects  or  errors  of  indi- 
viduals belonging  to  them.  The  practice  is,  unfor- 
tunately, not  confined  to  Mr.  Campbell ;  but  is  to 
be  the  more  deplored  on  this  account.  That  there 
were  faults  among  the  early  Baptist  ministers  no 
candid  man  acquainted  with  their  history  will  deny. 


26  CAMPBELLISM   EE-EXAMINED, 

They  were  mostly  uneducated,  in  the  technical 
sense  of  the  word  ;  some  of  them  were,  doubtless, 
enthusiastic  and  visionary  ;  and  others  entertained 
very  imperfect  views  of  the  system  of  divine  truth. 
But  the  great  majority  of  them  wore  intelligent, 
evangelical  preachers.  They  were  men  of  faith, 
prayer  and  righteousness — plain,  earnest,  faithful, 
fearless  ministers  of  the  gospel — whose  labors  God 
delighted  to  honor — and  who  left  a  blessed  impres- 
sion on  their  generation.  Many  of  them  I  knew, 
loved  and  venerated.  Ministers  more  learned,  and 
of  higher  pretensions,  I  have  known  ;  but  minis- 
ters, more  self-saqrificing,  laborious,  devout  and 
useful,-* I  do  not  hope  to  see.  Now,  I  do,  in  the 
name  of  these  departed  worthies,  most  solemnly 
])rotest  against  the  indiscriminate  censure  of  Mr. 
tj.  found  in  the  foregoing  quotaUon.  Had  he  af- 
firmed that  there  were  some  Baptist  ministers  of 
that  time  obnoxious  to  these  censures,  though  I 
should  have  deemed  them  extravagant,  I  should, 
perhaps,  have  remained  silent  ;  but  when  he  charges 
these  evils  on  the  "  good  old  orthodox  preachers,'' 
without  exception,  or  discrimination,  I  must  deny 
the  correctness  of  the  accusations.  As  applied  to 
the  prominent  ministers  of  the  Dover  Association, 
and  of  the  Baptist  denomination  generally,  they 
are  an  exaggeration — a  caricature — I  will  not  sa}'  a 
"  slander,"  for  that  is  an  odious  term,  and,  I  trust, 
Mr.  C.  did  not  intend  to  do  them  injustice.     Thev 


CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED.  27 

did  not  disparage  learned  ministers  ;  but  were 
making  liberal  contributions  for  tbe  establishment 
of  the  Columbian  College,  and  other  Institutions, 
for  the  education  of  young  preachers.  Their  views 
of  the  nature  of  religion,  and  of  spiritual  influ- 
ence, were  those  which  now  prevail  among  the  Bap- 
tists. "  Holy  Ghost  religion"  is  a  phrase  which  I 
do  not  remember  ever  to  have  heard.  For  the  cor- 
rectness of  these  remarks,  I  appeal  to  the  writings 
of  Elder  A,  Broaddus,  contained  in  the  Christian 
Baptist,  to  ^  he  early  pages  of  the  Religious  Herald, 
and  other  publications  of  that  time. 

The  preaching  of  Elder  John  Kerr  is  singled  out 
by  Mr.  Campbell  as  a  special  subject  of  animadver- 
sion.    I  quote  from  p.  130. 

"  Just  at  this  point,  I  congratulate  myself,  that 
Elder  Jeter  will  remember,  with^me,  what  an  ex- 
citement and  tumult  of  feeling  Elder  Carr  (Kerr) 
got  up  at  the  Dover  Association,  to  which  he  has  allu- 
ded in  the  commencement  of  our  acquaintance,  after 
I  had  set  down  from  a  calm  and  deliberate  address 
on  the  first  principles  of  the  gospel.  It  is  only  thir- 
ty years  since  on  the  7th  of  October  next,  (1855.^ 
It  was  equal  to  Wesleyan  Methodism  in  its  palmiest 
days.  What  a  shaking  there  was  in  the  camp  ! 
What  a  hugging  of  men  with  men  !  What  weep- 
ing of  females  J  What  screaming  of  negroes  !  I 
thought  I  had  got  into  a  Methodist  Camp-meeting, 
and  began  to  apprehend  that  it  would  find  its  way 


28  CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED. 

into  the  preacher's  tent,  *  ^  *  But  apart  from 
the  action,  the  vociferation,  and  the  intonations  of 
he  ascending  and  descending  climax,  of  passion,  I 
yould  not  hear  one  word,  or  appreciate  one  idea,  as 
the  worthy  parent  of  what  I  saw  and  heard  in  the 
great  congregation.  I  confess  it  awakened  more 
painful  than  pleasurable  associations,  because  indi- 
cating a  condition  of  the  pulpit,  and  of  the  public 
taste,  that  depressed  my  spirit,  and  saddened  my 
heart  with  many  a  painful  association  and  anticipa- 
tion as  likely  to  arise  from  my  new  connexion." 

1  then  heard  Elder  Kerr  preach  for  the  first  time, 
and  was  somewhat  disappointed  in  his  sermon.  It 
was  more  declamatory,  and  less  instructive  than  I 
had  expected.  Of  its  effects  my  recollections  are 
less  vivid  than  are  those  of  Mr.  C.  I  had  afterwards 
frequently  the  opportunity  of  hearing  Kerr  preach, 
and  I  deem  it  due  to  his  memory,  in  view  of  the 
above  disparaging  extract,  to  state  my  impressions 
of  his  abilities  and  influence.  God  has  endowed  his 
ministers  with  a  diversity  of  gifts.  On  Elder  Kerr 
was  bestowed  the  gift  of  exhortation.  His  doctri- 
nal views  were  evangelical,  and  his  piety  sincere 
and  ardent.  He  taught  the  way  of  salvation  clearly. 
I  have  heard  many  preachers,  of  different  denomi- 
nations, and  many  distinguished  public  speakers, 
of  various  kinds  ;  but  I  must  say  that  for  beautiful, 
impassioned,  and  effective  declamation,  I  have  ne- 
ver heard   him  eg  lalled.     He  was  one  of  the  most 


campbeLlism  re-examined.  29 

powerful  of  natural  orators.  Thousands  now  living 
can  bear  testimony  to  the  efficiency  of  his  labors 
Had  he  been  as  highly  gifted  in  the  instruction  of 
the  disciples  as  he  was  in  the  conversion  of  sinners, 
the  history  of  the  Bethany  Keformation  in  Eastern 
Virginia  would  be  widely  different  fiMin  what 
it  is. 

On  page  69,  we  read — "  In  the  year  1825,  the 
Virginia  Baptists  immersed  the  candidates  into 
their  own  experience.  Yes,  their  Christian  expe- 
rience !  !  Thousands  of  them  had  as  much  CTiris- 
tian  experience  before  baptism  as  after  it.  A 
few  added  that  they  had  tlie  additional  experience 
of  *  having  obeyed  a  command ' !  I  saw  some  strange 
sights,  and  heard  some  strange  utterances,  at  the 
Baptist  Camp-meetings  in  Old  Virginia,  in  those 
days." 

I  do  not  comprehend  what  Mr.  Campbell  means 
by  baptizing  "candidates  into  their  oion  experience." 
The  Baptists  have  always  required  an  experience 
in  order  to  baptism — an  experience  comprehending 
the  various  exercises  which  result  in  conversion. 
No  man  is  fit  for  baptism  who  has  not  an  experience 
of  the  depravity  of  his  heart,  the  sinfulness  of  sin, 
his  guilt  in  the  sight  of  God,  soriew  for  sin,  a  sense 
of  his  own  insufficiency,  trust  in  Christ,  love  to 
him,  and  his  people,  in  fine,  all  those  convictions, 
conflicts,  sorrows  and  joys  which  attend  the  new 
birth  ;    and    tliis    may   be  called   Christian    expe- 


3C  •  CAMPBELLISM    KEj-EXAMINED, 

rience — because  it  is  the  experience,  not  of  a  pagan 
or  infidel,  but  of  a  young  convert — an  unbaptized 
Christian.  If  this  is  what  Mr.  C.  means  by  being 
baptized  into  experience,  then  the  Baptists,  not  only 
in  the  year  1825,  but  in  all  times  have  baptized  the 
"  candidates  into  their  own  experience"  as  John 
baptized  his  disciples  into  repentance.  Mat.  3  :  11. 
If  this  is  not  what  he  means,  what  does  he  mean  ? 
But  saj^s  Mr, C,  "I  saw  some  strange  sights, 
and  heard  some  strange  utterances,  at  the  Baptist 
Canip-meetings  in  Old  Virginia,  in  those  days" — 
"in  the  year  1825,"  as  the  context  shows.  I  con- 
fess this  language  surprises  me.  By  "Old  Vir- 
ginia," he  must  mean  Eastern  Va. ;  for,  not  only  is 
that  the  usual  import  of  the  appellation,  but  the 
Baptists  in  Western  Va.,  so  far  as  I  am  informed, 
have  never  held  camp-meetings.  Now,  from  all 
that  I  can  learn,  and  I  think  my  information  is 
accurate,  the  Baptists  of  Old  Virginia  had  no  camp- 
meetings  "in  those  days."  The  first  Baptist  camp- 
meetings  of  Old  Va.,  within  the  present  century, 
except  a  few  feeble  attempts,  the  dates  of  which  I 
do  not  recollect,  at  a  point  which  Mr.  C.  I  pre- 
sume has  not  visited,  occurred  in  the  year  1831. 
Since  that  time  they  have  had  but  few.  And  can 
I  be  mistaken  in  supposing  that,  if  Mr.  C.  attended 
any  of  them,  he  did  so  incognito  ?  My  curiosity  is 
much  excited.  Is  it  possible  that  in  disguise,  he 
has  been  attending  Baptist  camp-meetings  in  Old 


CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED.  3] 

Virginia,  and  seeing  ^'strange  sights,"  and  hearing 
"strange  utterances  ?"  Or  does  he  draw  upon  his 
imagination,  or  the  dim  recollections  of  a  departed 
dream,  for  these  wonderful  statements  ?  I  hope 
that  in  his  promised  book,  he  will  not  only  reveal" 
these  strange  sights  and  utterances,  but  also  the 
tiynes  and  places  of  the  "  Baptist  Camp-meetings," 
at  which  his  knowledge  was  obtained.  He  may 
thus  dispel  the  mystery  which  otherwise  must  for- 
erer  rest  upon  his  astounding  disclosures. 

TRUE    AND    SPURIOUS   REFORMATIOX. 

I  admitted  in  Campbellism  Examined,  the  neces- 
sity of  a  reformation  among  the  Baptists  at  the 
time  Mr.  Campbell  first  appeared  in  Eastern  Vir- 
ginia. It  required  no  great  stretch  of  candor  to 
make  the  concession.  They  have  made  some  pro- 
gress since  that  time  in  knowledge  and  efficiency, 
but,  unfurtunately,  they  still  need  reformation.  In 
nothing  are  they  perfect  ;  in  many  things  their  de- 
fects are  obvious.  But  of  what  sect,  or  church,  or 
class  of  Christians,  are  not  these  admissions  true  ? 
The  Disciples,  Mr.  Campbell  himself  being  judge, 
stand  in  need  of  farther  reformation.  The  reviser 
seized  hold  of  these  concessions  to  justify  the  refor- 
mation for  which  he  pleaded.  Referring  to  an  ex- 
tract from  Campbellism  Examined,  he  says,  "  This 
concedes  all  we  ask,  and  all  that  our  position  before 
the  living  age  requires."    p.  67.     "  That  a  reforma- 


32  CAMPBELLISM    EE-EXAMINED. 

tion  was  needed/'  lie  says  in  another  place,  quoting 
from  the  same  work,  "by  the  Christian  sects  of 
that  time,  none  who  possess  a  tolerable  acquaint- 
ance with  the  (their)  condition,  and  the  claims  of 
the  gospel,  will  deny."  p.  25.  To  which  he  adds, 
"  Well,  have  we  not  done  the  work  ?  If  so,  why 
complain?"    p.  144. 

Now,  this  reasoning  seems  to  be  very  plausible— 
a  reformation  was  admitted  to  be  necessary — we 
wrought  a  reformation — "  and  this  is  all  that  our 
position  before  the  living  age  requires  " — but  it  is 
merely  plausible.  The  argument  resembles  that 
of  a  surgeon  who  justifies  the  amputation  of  a  limb 
on  the  ground  that  the  patient  had  a  diseased  eye. 
I  concede  the  necessity  of  a  reformation  in  the  Bap- 
tist churches — a  reformation  "  in  spirit  and  prac- 
tice, rather  than  doctrine"  or  in  doctrine,  as  Mr.  C. 
would  express  it.  But,  having  disinterred  what  he 
termed  the  "  ancient  gospel,"  he  engaged  zealously 
in  the  propagation  of  certain  speculations — such  as 
— "  truth  alone  is  all  that  is  necessary  to  the  con- 
version of  men  " — that  men  are  justified  by  an  act 
of  faith— "and  this  act  is  sometimes  called  immer- 
sion, regeneration,  conversion" — that  Peter  has 
"  made  repentance,  or  reformation,  and  immersion, 
equally  necessary  to  forgiveness  " — "  The  helief  of 
this  one  fact " — that  Jesus  is  the  Messiah — ^^and 
submission  to  one  institution,  expressive  of  it,  is  all 
that  is  required  of  heaven  to  admission    into  the 


CAMPBELLISM   RE-EXAMINED,  2^-^ 

church."  With  equal  zeal  he  opposed  certain 
measures  and  practices  deemed  by  the  Baptists 
important  for  the  prosperity  of  the  churches  and 
the  extension  of  the  Eedeemor's  kingdom.  But 
this  subject  demands  a  more  careful  examination. 

One  of  the  concessions  by  which  Mr.  Campbell 
seeks  to  justify  his  reformation  is  the  following  : 

"  Among  the  Baptist  churches  there  were  some 
sad  evils.  .  In  parts  of  the  country,  the  churches  were 
infected  with  an  antinomian  spirit,  and  blighted  by 
a  heartless,  speculative,  hair-splitting  orthodoxy. 
These  churches  were  mostly  penurious,  opposed  to 
Christian  missions,  and  all  enlarged  plans  and  self- 
denying  efforts,  for  promoting  the  cause  of  Christ." 
Camp.  Ex.  pp.  25,  26. 

The  class  of  Baptists  described  in  the  above  ex- 
tract, were  called  in  some  places  "  Old  School,"  and 
in  others,  from  the  name  of  the  place  at  which  they 
held  their  seceding  Convention,  "Black-rock"  Bap- 
tists. They  separated  themselves  from  the  regular 
Baptists  about  the  time  of  the  rise  of  Mr.  Camp- 
bell's reformation.  This  class  of  Baptists  prevailed 
considerably  in  the  region  of  Bethany.  That  the 
reviewer  should  have  adduced  the  conceded  evils 
among  this  small  fragment  of  Baptists  to  vindicate 
his  efforts  at  reformation  fills  me  with  surprise.  I 
wonder  that  when  he  did  so  his  cheeks  had  not  been 
tinged  with  a  blush. 

Now.  it  is  full)  conceded  that  these  antiuomian 


34  CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED. 

Baptists  greatly  needed  reformation  ;  but,  unfor- 
tunately, Mr.  C.  has  done  little,  or  nothing,  tc 
eradicate  the  evils  among  them.  A  few  of  them 
adopted  his  doctrinal  peculiarities,  because  he  con- 
curred with  them  in  certain  cherished  opinions  ; 
but  the  mass  of  them  are  as  ignorant,  bigoted  and 
fruitless,  as  they  were  at  the  dawn  of  the  Bethany 
Eeformation.  But  this  is  not  all.  Mr.  Campbell, 
far  from  endeavoring  to  correct  the  evils  prevalent 
among  them,  catered  to  their  corrupt  taste,  defended 
their  erroneous  views,  and  confirmed  them  in  their 
opposition  to  "all  enlarged  plans  and  self-denying 
efforts  for  promoting  the  cause  of  Christ."  But,  I 
must  notice  particulars. 

"  These  churches  ivere  inostly  penurious ." — 
Their  covetousness  was  a  great  evil,  and  much 
needed  correction.  How  did  Mr.  Campbell  propose 
to  remove  it  ?  Let  any  one  read  the  pages  of  the 
Christian  Baptist,  and  he  will  learn.  By  insinu- 
ating that  the  clergy — ministers  of  Christ,  not  en- 
listed under  the  banner  of  his  reformation — not 
some  of  them  merely,  but  the  cla  s — were  selfish 
and  mercenary ;  and  that  all  benevolent  schemes 
for  promoting  the  interests  of  religion  were  inge- 
nious priestly  devices  to  fleece  the  flock  of  Christ. 
"  Look,"  said  he,  "  again  at  the  sums  of  money 
squandered  at  home  and  abroad  under  the  pretest 
of  converting  the  world  ;   and  again,  wherein  is  the 


CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED.  35 

heathen  world  benefited  by  such  conversions  ?" — 
Chris.  Bap.,  p.  72. 

These  antinomian  Baptist  churches  ''  icere  op- 
posed to  Christian  missions."  This  was  a  sore 
evil,  which  many  of  our  brethren  lamented,  and  en- 
deavored by  their  faithful  instruction,  and  by  their 
consistent  example,  to  correct.  But  by  what  method 
did  Mr.  Campbell  aim  to  remove  it  ?  By  proclaim- 
ing that  Christian  missions — which  distinguished  the 
age — were  unauthorized — sectarian-rebellion  against 
the  throne  and  government  of  Messiah — like  the 
Catholic  missions — and  in  many  instances  "  a  sys- 
tem of  iniquitous  peculation  and  speculation."  For 
condensed  proof  on  these  points  the  reader  may  con- 
sult Campbellism  Examined,  pp.  42-59.  The  suc- 
cess of  this  method  Mr.  Campbell  triumphantly 
published  from  a  Kentucky  correspondent,  in  the 
Christian  Baptist,  p.  144.  "  Your  paper  has  well 
nigh  stopped  missionary  operations  in  this  state." 

These  hair-splitting  Baptist  churches,  self-styled 
"  orthodox,"  tvere  ojyposcd  to  ^'all  enlarged  plans 
and  self-denying  efforts  for  2yromoting  the  cause  of 
Christ." 

They  were  opposed  to  all  ptlans  for  the  education 
of  young  ministers.  They  looked  upon  them  as 
tending  to  corrupt  the  ministry,  to  destroy  the  best 
interests  of  souls,  and  to  dishonor  Christ.  This  evil, 
though  not  confined  to  antinomian  Baptists,  was, 
hrough  the  faithful  labors,  and  beni-rii  influence  of 


3^  CAMPBELLISM    EE-EXAMINED. 

our  fathers,  beginning,  at  the  period  of  Mr.  0am p- 
"bell's  coming  among  us,  to  disappear  in  the  regular 
Baptist  churches.     How  did  the  reformer  propose  to 
aid  in  the  correction  of  the  evil  7     Not  by  condemn- 
ing the  education  of  ungodly  young  men  for  the  Chris- 
tian ministry — ^as  he  now  would  have  the  world  to 
believe — a  practice  which  has  never  received  the 
slightest  countenance  among  Baptists — but  by  pub- 
lishing concerning  a  discourse  by  the  Rev.  Gideon 
Blackburn,  D.  D.,  as  follows — "  His  sermon  is  in- 
tended to  proclaim  that  it  is  the  duty  of  the  church 
to  prepare  in^her  bosom  pious  youth" — note  this, 
2nous  youth — "  for  the  gospel  ministry.     Now  this 
is  really  a  new  message  from  the  skies,  for  there  is 
not  one  word  from  Genesis  to  John,  which  says  that 
it  is  the  duty  of  the  church  to  prepare  pious  youth 
for  the  gospel  ministry." — Christian  Baptist,  p.  221, 
By  such  instruction  did  Mr.  C.  endeavor  to  reform 
the  antinomian  Baptists  ;    and,  truly,  it  was  most 
refreshing  to  their   spirits,  and,  deeply  averse  as 
they  were  to  progress,  it  was  the  means  of  bring- 
ing a  few  of  them  to  embrace  the  "ancient  gospel." 
These  churches  were  opposed  to  the  "reasonable 
support  of  pastors."     This  evil  was  not  confined  to 
this  class  of  Baptists,  but  was  "  too  much  neglected" 
in  all  the  churches.     Before  Mr.  Campbell  made 
his  debut  in  Eastern  Virginia,  many  Baptist  min- 
isters had    perceived  the  evil,  and  made  vigorous 
efforts  to  arrest  it      The  Eev.  Abner  W.  Clopton 


CAMPBELLISM   KE-EXAMINED.  37 

is  worthy  of  a  monument  for  his  fearkts,  earnest, 
and  successful  labors  in  correcting  it.  Then  the 
Bethany  Reformer,  learned,  eloqueit  and  distin- 
guished, came  to  his  aid,  not  proclaiming  with 
Christ,  "  the  workman  is  worthy  of  his  hire" — but 
in  his  own  peculiar  style,  "  that  every  man  who  re- 
ceives money  for  preaching  the  gospel,  or  for  ser- 
mons, by  the  day,  month,  or  year,  is  a  hireling  in 
the  language  of  truth  and  soberness." — Chn.  Bap. 
p.  233,  And  then  he  urged  on  the  churches  the 
duty  of  supporting  their  pastors,  in  the  following 
manner  :  "  The  modern  clergy  say  they  do  not 
preach  for  money.  Very  well ;  let  the  people  pay 
them  none,  and  they  will  have  as  much  of  their 
preaching  still,"~-Chn.  Bap.  p»  43. 

By  such  efforts  did  Mr.  Campbell  seek  to  pro- 
mote the  reformation,  the  necessity  of  which  I  con- 
ceded, and  which  concession,  he  says,  is  "  all  that 
we  ask,  and  all  that  our  position  before  the  living 
age  requires."     He  is  welcome  to  the  concession  ! 

THE  INFLUENCE  OF  THE  HOLY  SPIRIT  IN  CONVERSION. 

The  larger  part  of  Mr,  Campbell's  review  is  de- 
roted  to  the  discussion  of  this  important  topic.  Be- 
gin where  he  might,  he  was  sure  to  glide  into  this 
subject.  It  is  no  easy  matter  to  answer  his  argu- 
ments, because  they  are  without  arrangement,  fre- 
quently on  collateral  issues,  and  not  always  perspi- 
cuous.    Confusion,  which  in  an  army  makes  defeat 


38  CAMPBELLISM   RE-EXAMINED. 

easy,  in  an  argument  renders  it  difficult.  I  will 
briefly  notice  the  most  important  points  in  the  dis- 
cussion. 

In  CampbeUism  Examined,  I  attempted  to  show 
that  Mr.  Campbell's  teaching  on  the  subject  of  the 
Spirit's  agency,  in  the  conversion  of  sinners,  is  in- 
consistent and  contradictory.  I  admitted  that  he 
had  put  forth  orthodox  views  on  this  subject — that 
he  had  maintained  the  popular  doctrine  that  the 
Spirit  and  the  Word  co-operate  in  conversion.  I 
also  stated  that,  he  taught,  with  equal  clearness, 
that  the  Spirit  in  conversion  does  nothing  more 
than  persuade  the  sinner,  by  words  or  other  signs, 
addressed  to  the  understanding,  to  turn  to  Grod. 
Numerous  quotations  were  furnished  from  his  wri- 
tings to  confirm  these  statements.  I  was  not  alone 
in  this  interpretation  of  his  language.  It  was  so 
understood  by  the  Eev.  A.  Broaddus,  distinguished 
for  his  intelligence  and  candor.  Dr.  Lynd,  whose 
''  scholar-like  epistle "  reminds  Mr.  Campbell  "  so 
much  in  matter,  manner  and  spirit,  of  the  learned, 
and  liberal,  and  gentlemanly  Dr.  Staughton,"  says, 
in  his  brief  notice  of  CampbeUism  Examined,  "  It  is 
clearly  shown  by  the  quotations  that  Mr,  Campbell's 
views  certainly  destroyed  the  agency  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  in  regeneration."--- Jfi7?.  Har.  141.  Indeed, 
I  do  not  remember  to  have  found  an  intelligent 
Christian,  not  a  Reformer,  who  has  paid  attention 
to  the   subject,  that  does  not  concur  in  this  view  ; 


CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED.  39 

and  many  of  the  Reformers  not  only  admit  :bftt  it 
was  taught  by  Mr.  Campbell,  but  most  heartily  em- 
brace and  defend  it.  As  I  regarded  this  doctrine 
as  erroneous  and  of  injurious  tendency,  it  was  dis- 
cussed at  considerable  length. 

I  had  no  wish  to  convict  Mr.  Campbell  of  hetero- 
doxy ;  but  sincerely  hoped  that  he  would  endeavor 
to  set  himself  right  on  this  vital  principle  of  Chris- 
tianity. If  his  views  on  this  point  are  in  harmony 
with  those  of  evangelical  Christians  generally,  no- 
thing can  be  easier  than  to  make  it  appear.  He 
owes  it  to  himself,  and  the  cause  of  truth,  to  say 
nothing  of  those  who  have  been  perplexed  by  his 
apparently  conflicting  positions,  not  merely  to  state 
his  views  on  this  momentous  subject  without  ambi- 
guity, but  to  show,  if  it  can  be  shown,  how  these 
views  can  be  harmonized  with  teaching,  which  in 
the  estimation  of  everybody,  except  Mr.  Campbell, 
and  his  peculiar  friends,  is  flatly  contradictory ;  and 
if  this  cannot  be  shown,  to  acknowledge  that  he  has 
put  forth  indefensible  statements.  How  easy  it 
would  be  for  him  to  evince  that  he  holds  substan- 
tially the  views  that  have  been  generally  entertained 
on  this  subject  by  intelligent,  evangelical  Christians, 
such  as  those  recorded  in  Campbellism  Examined, 
pp.  183-185, — and  that  he  repudiates  whatever 
he  may  have  written  not  in  agreement  with  this 
teaching. 

I  will  now  fully  illustrate  my  meaning.     In  the 


^.v 


40  CAMPBELLISM    RE-EX  ft^MINED. 


Debate  with  Mr.  Bice,  Mr.  Campbell  says,  '*  There 
is  the  Word  alone  system,  and  there  is  the  Spirit 
alone  system.  I  believe  in  neither."  In  Chris- 
tianity Restored,  he  says,  "  All  the  power  of  God 
or  man  is  exhibited  in  the  truth  which  they  propose. 
Therefore,  we  may  say,  that  if  the  light,  or  the  truth, 
contain  all  the  moral  power  of  God,  then  truth  alone 
is  all  that  is  necessary  to  the  conversion  of  men,  for 
we  have  before  argued  and  proved,  that  the  convert- 
ing power  is  moral  power." — p.  362.  Now,  Mr. 
Campbell  may  blame  my  head  or  my  heart,  but  I 
am  not  alone  in  my  infirmity  ;  there  are  many  who 
are  convinced  that  when  he  says,  in  one  place,  I  do 
not  believe  in  "^Ae  Word  alone  system,"  and,  in 
another  place,  that  "truth  alone  is  all  that  is  neces- 
sary to  the  conversion  of  men,"  he  puts  forth  con- 
tradictory statements.  I  cannot  reconcile  them  ; 
if  Mr.  Campbell  can,  does  he  not  owe  it  to  the  Ke- 
formation  for  which  he  pleads,  and  to  the  weakness, 
or  prejudice  of  its  opponents,  to  do  so  1  But  if  he 
cannot,  does  he  not  owe  it  to  the  cause  of  truth 
and  piety,  to  confess  his  error,  and  to  inform  the 
world  by  which  position  he  is  resolved  to  abide  ? 
"There  lies  the  rub,"  It  may  be  unpleasant  and 
humiliating  to  him  to  admit  that  he  has  contradicted 
himself ;  but  in  no  other  way,  can  he  so  highly 
elevate  himself  in  the  estimation  of  the  Christian 
public,  as  by  a  frank  and  manly  confession  of  his 
error. 


CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED. 

Mr.  Campbell  has  his  own  methcd  of  treating 
this  subject,  and  I  must  attend  to  it.  He  has  ob- 
served no  order  in  the  discussion,  but  I  will  reduce 
it  to  the  best  form  I  can. 

First,  then,  Mr.  C  suhstantialhj concurs  lu'itlt  me 
in  my  main  position  on  this  suJyect.  He  writes, 
"  He  (I)  propose  to  prove  '  that  there  is  an  influ- 
ence of  the  Spirit,  internal,  mighty,  and  efficacious, 
differing  from  moral  suasion,  hut  ordinarily  ex- 
erted through  the  inspired  Word  in  the  conversion 
of  sinners'  Ordinarily,  yes,  ordinarily.  We  say 
always  ;  he  (I)  says  ordinarily ;  therefore  the  con- 
troversy is  narrowed  down  to  the  extraordinary 
cases."™pp,  131,  132. 

These  extraordinary  cases  shall  bo  considered  in 
due  time,  I  understand  Mr,  Campbell  as  agreeing 
with  me  that  the  conversion  of  sinners  is  effected 
not  by  moral  suasion  alone — not  merely  by  argu- 
ments addressed  to  the  eye  or  ear — but  by  an  inter- 
nal, mighty,  efficacious  influence  of  the  Spirit  through 
the  ivritten  Word.  This  is  the  orthodox  belief  /But 
it  was  not  for  maintaining  this  truth  that  Mr,  Camp- 
bell was  censured  and  opposed  by  the  Baptists. 
They  did  not  call  in  question  this  doctrine.  He 
cannot  find  in  all  their  controversies  with  him,  a 
single  sentence  in  condemnation  of  it.  But  he,  and 
his  adherents  were  condemned  for  teaching  that 
nothing  but  truth  addressed  to  the  understanding 
is  necessary  in  conversion — indeed,  that  there  is  no 


42  CAMPBELLISM   5.E-EXAMINED. 

influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit  until  after  baptism. 
When  Mr.  Campbell  establishes  his  orthodoxy  on 
this  point,  he  abandons  his  Keformation.  All  that 
he  has  written  against  the  speculations,  theories 
and  mysticism  of  the  "  populars" — and  he  has  writ- 
ten volumes  on  these  subjects — must  be  understood 
as  directed  against  the  crudities  of  a  few  visionaries, 
the  extravagancies  of  a  still  smaller  number  of  ultra- 
Calvinists,  or  men  of  straw  of  his  own  creation. 
But  he  does  not  stop  at  the  admission  that  my  chief 
proposition,  w^ith  the  exception  of  a  single  word,  is 
sound,  and  I  must  follow  his  devious  course. 

Secondly — Mr.  Campbell  utterly  misconceives  the 
design  of  my  argument  on  the  influence  of  the  Spirit. 
He  says,  "  To  gather  out  of  one  hundred  and  fifty 
pages  of  his  work  any  issue  at  all,  it  must  be  expressed 
in  this  formula — The  Holy  Spirit  ivories  upon  the 
human  spirit,  hy  actual  contact,  or  impacts,  ivithout 
and  independent  of  either  law  or  gospel.  I  repeat 
it,  if  there  be  either  sense  or  reason,  argument  or 
point,  in  his  book,  it  is  this." — pp.  258,  259. 

This  may  do  well  enough  for  those  whose  infor- 
mation on  this  subject  is  derived  solely  from  the 
pages  of  the  Millennial  Harbinger  ;  but  I  am  quite 
persuaded  that  of  all  the  readers  of  my  book  he  is 
the  only  one  who  has  fallen  into  this  strange  mis- 
apprehension. Nothing  can  be  more  explicit  than 
my  statements  on  this  subject.  "  It  is  fully  admit- 
ted," I  say,  "that  the  Spirit  operates  through  the 


OAMPBBLLrSM    RE-EXAMIKED.  43 

Word  in  the  conversion  and  sanctification  of  men. 
But  I  understand  Mr.  Campbell  to  maintain  that 
the  influence  of  the  Spirit  in  the  work  of  conversion 
is  limited,  and  of  necessity,  to  the  simple  presenta- 
tion of  arguments,  motives,  truth,  to  the  minds  of 
men,  by  means  of  words,  and  other  signs — that  all 
the  power  of  the  Spirit  in  the  conversion  of  men  is 
moral  suasion." — Camp.  Ex.,  p.  123.  On  the 
position  above  ascribed  to  Mr.  Campbell — a  posi- 
tion which  he  did  maintain,  if  language  can  express 
it — I  took  issue  ;  and  I  do  not  think  that  he  can 
find  a  sentence  in  the  seventy-seven  pages  devoted 
to  the  discussion  inconsistent  with  my  chief  aim. 
True,  I  did  maintain  that  the  Spirit  operates  in 
conversion  ordinarily  through  the  Word  ;  but  as 
the  exceptional  cases  were  not  material  in  the  dis- 
cussion, I  did  not  dwell  on  them.  To  preclude  any 
misconception  of  my  views  on  this  subject,'  however, 
I  penned  the  following  passage — "  On-  one  merely 
speculative  point" — supposing  that  Mr.  Canipbcll 
admitted  '  that  conversion  is  effected  by  the  per- 
sonal agency  of  the  Spirit' — "  he  differs  from  most 
or  all  of  his  brethren.  They  believe  that  this  is 
God's  ordinary,  or  usual  way  of  converting  sinners  ; 
the  only  way  in  which  we  should  hope,  labor  and 
pray  for  their  conversion;  but  that  He  is  not  lim- 
ited to  this  way."  Now,  mark  the  extraordinary 
instances  contended  for.  "  In  the  case  of  dying  in- 
fants or  idiots,  they  believe  that  a  moral  change, 


44  CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED. 

equivalent  to  regeneration,  is  effected  hy  the  direct, 
personal  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  ivithout  the 
Word."—Gami^.  Ex.  p.  186.  How  Mr.  Campbell 
could  have  so  egregiously  misapprehended  my  aim 
and  argument,  I  cannot  comprehend. 

Thirdly — Mr.  Campbell,  not  only  misstates  my 
position  in  the  discussion,  but  insists  that  I  offered 
no  argument  in  support  of  my  true  position.  He 
quotes  from  Campbellism  Examined,  "  Mr.  Camp- 
bell maintains,  or  did  tnaintain,  that  all  the  con- 
vertiiig  poioer  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  in  the  arguments 
or  motives  ivhich  he  i^resents  to  the  mind  in  the 
written  Word,  On  this  point  I  take  issue  with  him. 
I  maintain  that  tliere  is  an  influence  of  the  Spirit, 
internal,  mighty,  arid  effi-cacious,  differing  from- 
7)ioral  suasion,  hut  ordinarily  exerted  through  the 
inspii'ed  Word,  in  the  conversion  of  sinners." — p. 
125.  Mr,  Campbell  having  furnished  this  extract, 
proceeds  to*  remark,  "  Now,  with  what  argument 
does  he  (Mr.  Jeter)  assail  or  refute  wliat  he  assumes 
and  affirms  I  did,  or  I  do  maintain,  concerning  the 
converting  power  ?  He  makes  an  issue,  but  what 
does  he  prove  ?  What  arguments  ?  What  is  the 
first,  the  second,  the  third  ?  I  ask  what  is  the 
frst  ?  I  cannot  find  it,  unless  it  be  the  quotation 
of  "  the  wind  bloweth  where  it  pleases  ;"  and  "  so  is 
every  one  that  is  horn  of  the  Spirit,"  So  what  ? 
Like  the  wind  blowing  ? — !  I  again  ask — How  is 
evvry  one  so  liJ:e  the  wind  hloicing  ?  (^c.     If  Hiw 


CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED.  45 

Jeter's  salvation  depended  on  it,  I  question  if  he 
could  explain  the  word  so  in  this  case.  How  is  he 
BO  as  the  wind  ? — !  He  had  Letter  send  this  ques- 
tion to  Boston," — Mill.  Ear.  p.  131. 

The  above  passage  from  the  pen  of  Mr.  Campbell 
is  an  enigma,  explicable  only  on  the  supposition 
that  he  had  not  read  my  book.  He  fairly  states 
the  issues  which  I  made  with  him.  Having  endea- 
vored to  show  that  his  chief  argument  against  my 
position — the  inability  of  the  Spirit  to  do  more  in 
conversion  than  present  arguments  to  the  mind — 
was  fallacious  ;  I  proceeded  to  present  at  consider- 
able length,  five  arguments  against  Mr.  Campbell's 
theory  ot  conversion.  Concerning  this  theory,  I 
endeavored  to  prove — 

1.  That  it  overloohs,  or  at  least,  under-estimates 
the  inveteracy  of  human  depravity.  2.  Tliat  it  is 
incompatible  with  prayer  for  the  conversion  of  sin- 
ners. 3.  That  it  is  inconsistent  with  the  introduc- 
tion of  the  Millennium.  4.  That  it  is  contradicted 
by  the  plain  teaching  of  the  Scriptures.  And  5. 
That  it  is  inconsistent  with  the  p)^o.inly  revealed, 
and,  by  3Ir.  Campbell,  fairly  conceded  influence  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  in  believers  after  baptism.  These 
positions  the  reader  will,  I  think,  find  fully  con- 
firmed in  my  book. — pp.  125-174,  Now,  That  the 
reviewer  should  have  pronounced  these  arguments 
ilU>gical,  inconclusive,  weak,  absurd,  or  obscure  would 
fi-:    have   surprised   ino — such   an   estimate  of  ray 


46  CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED, 

labors  I  was  prepared  to  expect  from  him — but  I 
confess,  that,  after  all  the  strange  things  which  he 
has  affirmed  in  this  discussion,  I  was  surprised  to 
read  this  language,  "  He  (Mr.  Jeter)  makes  an  is- 
sue, but  what  does  he  prove  ?  What  arguments  ? 
What  is  the  first,  the  second,  the  third  ?  I  ask 
what  is  ihe  first  ?  I  cannot  find  it,  unless  it  be  the 
quotation  of  '  the  wind  bloweth  where  it  pleases/ 
and  '  so  is  every  one  that  is  born  of  the  Spirit.'  "  The 
reader  will  perceive  by  referring  to  Campbellism 
Examined,  p.  126,  that  the  quotation,  which  Mr. 
Campbell  considers  my  only  argument,  was  inci- 
dentally introduced,  without  comment,  in  reply  to 
an  assumption  of  his.  And  yet  he  can  find  no 
argument  but  this  in  favor  of  my  position.  I  will 
only  say,  the  arguments  are  visible.  A  well  taught 
school  boy  may  be  convinced  of  their  existence. 
But  Mr.  Campbell  cannot  see  them.  I  will  not 
affirm  of  him  as  he  does  of  me,  "  There  are  not  a 
few  things  in  science,  in  learning,  and  in  religion, 
which  Mr.  Jeter  will  not  understand  till  he  get 
another  head  or  heart.  We  are,  indeed,  sorry  for 
his  sake,  that  we  cannot  create  the  one  or  the 
other." — pp.  73,  74.  But  I  will  affirm  that  some 
influence  has  obscured  the  mental  vision  of  the  re- 
viewer. He  does  not  display  in  this  matter  his 
usnal  perspicacity.  And,  I  will  also  state  that 
multitudes  have  seen  the  arguments,  invisible  to 
wim,  and  have  the  full  conviction  that  they  have  not 


CAMPBELLISM   RE-EXAMINED.  47 

been  answered.  It  is  to  be  hoped  that  I  tfore  Mr. 
Campbell  shall  write  his  promised  book,  he  will  put 
on  his  spectacles,  and  make  diligent  search  for  them, 
that  he  may  not  only  find,  but  refute  them,  if  they 
are  fallacious,  lest  some  suspicious  persons  should 
surmise  that  the  difficulty  of  finding  a  reply  to  the 
arguments  was  the  real  cause  of  their  obscuration. 

But  suppose  I  ofiered  no  argument  to  sustain  my 
position — ^^  that  there  is  an  injluence  of  the  Spirit, 
internal,  mighty,  and  efficacious,  differing  from 
moral  s^iasion,  but  ordinarily  exerted  through  the  in- 
spired Word,  in  the  conversion  of  sinners — does  not 
Mr.  Campbell  concur  with  me  in  it,  except  as  to 
the  extraordinary  cases,  which  I  deemed  of  little 
importance  in  the  controversy  ?  Why,  then,  does 
he  seek  to  conceal  or  disparage  the  arguments  by 
which  I  aimed  to  establish,  not  the  exceptional 
cases  about  which  we  differ,  but  the  main  proposi- 
tion in  which  he  asserts  that  we  agree  ?  True,  he 
has  ignored,  rather-  than  refuted  these  arguments  ; 
but  by  censuring  a  sentence  here  and  there — by 
carrying  on  a  mere  logomachy — he  has  betrayed  a 
willingness  to  refute  them,  though  that  refutation 
would  be,  as  he  concedes,  at  the  expense  of  a  vital 
doctrine  of  Christianity. 

Fourthly. — I  will  now  notice  the  extraordinary 
cases  of  conversion  to  which  Mr.  Campbell  takes  ex- 
ception. He  agrees  with  me  that  there  is  an  influ- 
ence of  the  Spirit,  internal,  mighty,  and  efficacious. 


48  CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXA311NED. 

exerted  through  the  inspired  Word,  in  the  conversion 
of  sinners.  I  maintain,  however,  that  the  Spirit 
ordinarily,  and  Mr,  Campbell  that  the  Spirit  al- 
loays  operates  in  this  manner. 

Before  I  enter  on  the  discussion  of  this  point,  I 
will  premise  two  things — 

1,  The  exceptions  to  God's  usual  method  of  con- 
version are  distinctly  stated  in  my  book.  "  In  the 
case  of  dying  infants,  or  idiots,  they  (evangelical 
Christians,)  believe  that  a  moral  change,  equiva- 
lent to  regeneration,  is  eifected  by  the  direct,  per- 
sonal agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  without  the  Word." 
Camp.  Ex.,  p.  186.  This  point  I  did  not  discuss, 
deeming  it  of  no  practical  importance,  as  we  are 
called  to  labor  and  pray  for  the  conversion  of  sin- 
ners only  in  the  ordinary  way.  A  more  careful  con- 
sideration of  the  matter,  however,  has  convinced  me 
that  it  is  more  important  than  I  formerly  thought. 
Truth  is  a  unit.  Speculative,  may  readily  lead  to 
practical  error.  A  mistake  on  this  point  under  ex- 
amination must  tend  to  Pelagianism  on  the  one 
hand,  or  the  denial  of  spiritual  influence  on  the 
other  ;  and  both  these  extremes  are  subversive  of 
Christianity. 

2.  Mr.  Campbell,  who  was  anxious  to  turn  to 
his  advantage  my  |josition  that  the  Spirit  ordinari- 
ly converts  sinners Mihrough  the  inspired  Word,  was 
very  careful  to  keep'^|)ut  of  sight  that  the  plainly 
stated   exceptions  w^er^  "  dying  infants  or  idiots.'' 


^f;P*«l 


CAMPBELLIStt   RE-EXAMINED.  49 

I  do  not  charge  Mr.  Campbell  with  intentional  mis- 
representation ;  but  no  reader  of  the  Harbinger  could 
learn  my  views  on  this  subject.  He  would  certainly 
suppose,  contrary  to  the  explicit  statements  of  my 
book,  that  I  teach  that  adults  in  a  probationary 
state,  are  converted  by  the  Spirit,  sometimes  through 
the  Word,  and  sometimes  without  the  Word.  If 
the  reviewer  had  informed  his  readers  of  the  excep- 
tional cases  for  which  I  pleaded,  much  that  he  wrote 
of  "  a  purely  physical,  or  metaphysical  regenera- 
tion" would  have  appeared  to  be  worse  than  useless. 

I  shall  now  proceed  to  show  that  in  the  case  of 
dying  infants  and  idiots,  regeneration  takes  place 
hy  the  agency  of  the  Spirit  icithout  the  Word. 

I  use  the  term  ^'regeneration"  in  its  well  under- 
stood moral  sense — as  equivalent  to  conversion — or 
a  spiritual  renovation — that  change  by  which  the 
depraved  soul  of  man  is  fitted  for  the  heavenly  king- 
dom. 

In  support  of  my  position,  I  remark — 

1.  Tliat  whatever  may  he  legitimately  inferred 
from  the  Scriptures  is  a  part  of  divine  revelation, 
and  worthy  of  our  helief.  For  illustration — We  are 
expressly  informed  that  when  the  angel  announced 
the  birth  of  John  the  Baptist  to  Zacharias,  he  was 
struck  dumb  ;  Lu.  1 :  20  ;  we  infer  from  the  fact 
that  at  the  birth  of  the  promised  child,  the  family 
made  signs  to  the  father  "  how  he  would  have  him 
called,"  that  Zacharias  was  deaf — Lu.  1 :  62  ;  and  his 


50  CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED. 

deafness  and  dumbness  are  equally  matters  of  revela- 
tion, and  equally  entitled  to  our  credence.  If,  there- 
fore, it  can  be  fairly  inferred  from  tbe  teaching  of  the 
Scriptures  that  dying  infants  and  idiots  need  a  moral 
change  to  fit  them  for  heaven,  and  that  this  change 
is  effected  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  without  the  Word, 
these  truths  are  a  part  of  revelation,  and  worthy  of 
our  belief. 

2.  That  infants  are  born  with  depraved  natures. 
This  is  the  orthodox  belief ;  and  on  this  point  Mr. 
Campbell  is  orthodox.  In  the  Christian  System^ 
we  read,  "  True,  indeed,  it  is  ;  our  nature  was  cor- 
rupted by  the  fall  of  Adam  before  it  was  transmit- 
ted to  ys ;  and  hence  that  hereditary  imbecility  to  do 
good,  and  that  proncness  to  do  evil,  so  universally  ap- 
parent in  all  human  beings.  *  *  *  All  inherit  a 
fallen,  consequently  a  sinful  nature,  though  all  are 
not  equally  depraved." — pp.  28,  29.  Every  child 
of  Adam  enters  the  world  with  a  nature,  fallen — 
sinful — impotent  to  do  good,  and  prone  to  do  evil, 

3.  That  dying  infants  and  idiots  are  saved. 
This  is  the  popular  doctrine  ;  and,  whether  true  or 
false,  is  held  by  Mr.  Campbell.  I  quote  from  the 
Christian  System,  p.  29.  "  Condemned  to  natural 
death,  and  greatly  fallen  and  depraved  in  our  whole 
moral  constitution  though  we  certainly  are,  in  con- 
sequence of  the  sin  of  Adam  ;  still,  because  of  the 
interposition  of  the  second  Adam,  none  are  pun- 
ished with  everlasting  destruction  from  the  presence 


J  CAMPBELLISM    BE-EXAMINED.  51 

of  the  Lord,  but  those  who  actually  and  voluntarily 
sin  against  a  dispensation  of  mercy  under  which 
they  are  placed." 

Take  anothei'  quotation  from  the  Debate  with 
Kice,  p.  655.  "  The  atonement  of  the  Messiah  has 
made  it  compatible  with  God,  with  the  honor  of 
his  throne  and  government,  to  save  all  those  infants 
toko  die  in  Adam.  He  has  made  an  ample  provi- 
sion for  extending  salvation  from  all  the  conse- 
quences of  Adam's  sin  to  whomsoever  he  will."  I 
have  italicized  the  important  clause  in  the  extract. 

These  passages,  though  they  do  not  directly  af- 
firm, plainly  imply  the  salvation  of  infants,  dying 
in  infancy  ;  an  inference,  to  which,  if  I  understand 
Mr,  Campbell,  he  will  fully  assent. 

4.  That  the  salvation  of  dying  infants,  and  by 
a  parity  of  reason,  of  dying  idiots,  implies  regene- 
ration or  a  spiritual  change.  The  salvation  by 
Christ  is  deliverance  from  sin.  In  the  case  of  an 
adult,  it  is  deliverance  from  liability  to  punishment, 
by  the  remission  of  sins  ;  and  from  moral  corrup- 
tion, by  regeneration,  and  sanctification.  In  the 
case  of  an  infant,  dying  before  the  commission  of 
sin,  it  is  deliverance  from  depravity,  or  what  Mr. 
Campbell  terms  '^fallen — sinful  nature."  Less  than 
this  it  cannot  imply.  Heaven  is  a  holy  place,  and 
none  but  the  holy  are  admitted  to  its  enjoyments, 
or  can  appreciate  them.  Without  holiness  "no 
man  shall  see  the  Lord."     Infaftts,  dying  in  infancy. 


52  CAMPBELLISM    EE-EXAMINiCD. 

must  by  some  process,  known  or  unknown,  be  freed 
from  depravity — morally  renewed — regenerated,  or 
they  can  never  be  saved — never  participate  in  the 
joys  of  heaven.  This  point  is  so 'generally  admit- 
ted— so  clear^so  accordant  with  all  that  is  revealed 
of  the  heavenly  state,  and  the  moral  condition  of 
humanity,  that,  I  presume,  Mr.  CamjDbell  will  hot 
dispute  it.  If,  however,  he  does,  the  proof  of  it  is 
at  hand.  Jesus  said  to  Nicodemus,  "  Verily,  verily, 
I  say  unto  thee,  Except  a  man  be  born  again,  l)e 
cannot  see  the  kingdom  of  God."  John  3:  3.  The 
term  "  man,"  in  this  place,  is  used  in  its  generic 
sense,  to  denote  any  one  possessing  human  nature — 
any  man,  woman,  or  child.  No  human  being,  of 
any  sex,  age,  or  condition,  can  discern  the  nature, 
or  enjoy  the  blessings  of  Messiah's  reign,  without 
this  new,  or  divine  birth ;  and  this  is  true  of  his 
future  as  well  as  of  his  present  reign — true  of  his  ce- 
lestial as  Avell  as  of  his  earthly  reign.  A  spiritual 
change — a  holy  nature — is  indispensable  to  our  en- 
trance into  the  kingdom  of  God.  If  any  doubt  ex- 
isted as  to  the  correctness  of  the  interpretation,  it 
would  vanish  on  a  careful  examination  of  the  sixth 
verse,  "  That  which  is  bom  of  the  flesh  is  flesh  ;  and 
that  which  is  born  of  the  Spirit  is  spirit."  Jesus 
here  explains  the  nature  of  that  change,  which  he 
had  afilrmed  was  a  pre-requisite  to  admission  into 
the  kingdom  of  God.  It  Is  not  a  fleshly  birth.  "  That 
lohich  is  horn  of  tlm  flesh  is  flesh" — is  carnal,  de- 


CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED.  53 

praved,  sinful.  This  sense  of  the  text  is  so  obvious 
that  it  will  not,  I  am  sure,  be  denied.  Every  child 
that  has  been  born,  except  the  adorable  Jesus,  has 
inherited,  and  every  child  that  shall  hereafter  be 
born  will  inherit  this  fleshly,  depraved  nature  ;  and 
this  corrupt  nature  cannot,  without  a  f  i  iritual  reno- 
vation, participate  in  the  blessings  of  Messiah's 
reign.  Are  infants,  idiots,  or  any  other  class  of  hu- 
man beings  exempt  from  this  necessity — a  necessity 
which  has  its  foundation,  not  in  an  arbitrary  ap- 
pointment, but  in  the  depravity  of  human  nature, 
and  the  essential  principles  of  the  divine  govern- 
ment ?     Let  the  intelligent  and  candid  answer. 

Having  shown  that  the  salvation  of  infants  clear- 
ly implies  their  regeneration,  or  moral  renovation, 
I  remark, 

5.  That  this  change  is  effected  in  the  case  of  dy- 
ing infants  and  idiots  hy  the  agency  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  without  the  Word.  If  these  classes  of  hu- 
man beings  are  saved,  which  Mr.  Campbell  admits, 
they  are  converted — morally  renovated.  If  they 
are  renewed,  it  is  neither  by  human  nor  angelic 
agency.  The  atonement  of  Christ,  though  it  may 
procure,  is  not  the  agency  which  effects  this  change. 
In  the  scheme  of  human  salvation  revealed  in  the 
Scriptures,  the  Spirit  is  the  agent,  through  whoso 
power  and  grace,  depraved  man  is  renewed — made 
meet  for  the  inheritance  of  ttic  saints  in  light.  There 
is  a  *'  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  by  which  men 


54  CAMPBELLISM   RE-EXAMINED, 

are  saved,  but  I  know  of  no  otlier  renewing  agency 
adequate  to  such  a  result.  This  saving  renewal,  in 
the  case  of  dying  infants  and  idiots,  must  take  place 
without  the  influence  of  the  written  .Word,  for  of 
this  Word  they  are  ignorant.  Of  the  process  of  this 
renewal,  I  know  nothing  ;  hut  its  reality  seems  to 
be  plainly  inferable  from  the  acknowledged  and 
fundamental  doctrines  of  Christianity  ;  and  so  have 
reasoned  and  taught  the  enlightened  guides  of  the 
church.  Mr.  Campbell  will,  I  presume,  admit  that 
if  the  class  of  persons  under  consideration  are  re- 
generated, they  are  regenerated  by  the  Spirit, 
without  the  Word, 

I  will  now  furnish  an  instance  of  the  regenera- 
tion of  an  infant.  It  was  predicted,  by  the  angel, 
of  John  the  Baptist,  that  he  should  "  be  filled  with 
the  Holy  Ghost,  even  from  his  mother's  womb." — 
Lu.l:  15.  To  "be  filled  with  the  Spirit"  is  a 
high  Christian  privilege,  (Ep.  5:  18.)  implying, 
among  other  things,  a  pure  7iea7't.  "  The  infant  Bap- 
tist was  filled  tvitJi  the  Holy  Ghost."  For  what 
purpose  was  the  Spirit  richly  bestowed  on  him  ? 
Obviously,  to  fit  him  for  his  mission  ;  and  this  fit- 
ness included  moral  purity,  and  this  moral  purity 
supposed  regeneration.  It  cannot  be  imagined, 
without  irreverence,  that  the  Holy  Spirit  dwelt  in 
an  unregenerate,  sinful  heart.  Where  he  dwells 
there  must  be  holiness.  The  influence  of  the  Spirit 
on  the  infant,  John  the  Baptist,  was  not,  in  all  re- 


CAMPBELLISM   RE-EXAMINED.  55 

spects,  what  it  is  on  believers.  On  believers,  the 
Spirit  operates  through  the  Word  ;  on  the  infant 
harbinger,  He  operated  without  the  Word  ;  but  in 
both  cases  the  result  was  the  same — moral  purity. 
Will  Mr.  Campbell  deny  that  the  Baptist  was  made 
holy  from  his  birth  ?  Will  he  maintain  that  he 
was  filled  with  the  Spirit  by  means  of  the  written 
Word  ?  The  fact  that  this  unconscious  babe  was 
richly  imbued  with  the  Holy  Spirit,  scatters  to  the 
winds  a  whole  volume  of  Mr.  Campbell's  sophistries 
on  spiritual  influence.  The  Spirit,  that  by  an  ex- 
traordinary method,  fitted  the  infant  John  for  his 
mission,  can,  in  the  same  manner,  fit  dying  infants 
for  heaven. 

On  the  subject  of  infant  regeneration  Mr.  Camp- 
bell holds  peculiar  views — they  constitute  an  im- 
portant part  of  the  "Ancient  Gospel"  disinterred 
at  Bethany — and  they  shall  receive  special  atten- 
tion. 

I  quote  from  the  Review,  p.  123.  "Regenera- 
tion without  knowledge,  faith  or  repentance,"  in 
the  case  of  infants,  dying  in  infancy,  he  should,  in 
fairness  have  said,  "  is  the  confessed  doctrine  of  the 
Baptist  Confession  of  Faith,  and  of  all  the  '  ortho- 
dox Baptists'  in  the  United  States.  *  *"  *  To 
such  a  purely  pki/sical  or  metaphysical  regenera- 
tion, we  do,  indeed,  object."  «  »  *>  "  It  amounts  to 
neither  more  nor  less  than  the  impact  of  Spirit  upon 
gpirit — of  the  naked  Spirit  of  God  upon  the  naked 


66  CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED. 

spirit  of  man,  without  argument,  reason,  or  motive.'^ 
Such  are  Mr.  Campbell's  views  of  the  Baptist  doc- 
trine of  the  regeneration  of  infants,  dying  in  in- 
fancy. 

Let  us  now  attend  to  his  arguments  against  in- 
fant regeneration.  I  continue  the  extract  from  the 
Review — "  Need  we  assume,  that  whatever  consti- 
tutes regeneration  in  any  case — infant  or  adult,  Jew 
or  Gentile — constitutes  it  in  all  cases  ?  Are  not 
conception  and  birth  the  same  in  all  ages  of  the 
world,  and  in  all  casejs  ?"  I  will  give  him  a  fuller 
statement  of  the  argument  from  the  Debate  with 
Rice — p.  620.  '' Whatever  is  essential  to  7'egene- 
ration  in  liny  case,  is  essential  to  it  in  all  cases. 
The  change,  called  regeneration,  is  a  specific  change. 
It  consists  of  certain  elements,  and  is  effected  by  a 
specific  agency.  If  it  be  a  new  heart  given,  a  new 
life  communicated,  it  is  accomplished  in  all  cases, 
as  generation  is,  by  the  same  agency  and  instru- 
mentality. If,  then,  the  Spirit  of  God,  without 
faith,  without  the  knowledge  of  the  Gospel,  in  any 
case  regenerates  an  individual,  he  does  so  in  all 
cases." 

As  Mr.  Campbell  frequently  introduces  this  ar- 
gument, and  lays  great  stress  on  it,  it  is  proper  to 
test  its  strength.  There  is  a  manifest  sophism 
lurking  in  the  language  of  the  argument.  "  What- 
ever is  essential  to  regeneration  in  any  case,  is  essen- 
\ial  to  it  in  all  cases."     This  is  a  mere  truism — 


CAMPBELLISM    EE-EXAMINED.  57 

equivalent  to  saying,  "Wh:Jever  is  essential  to  re- 
generation, is  essential  to  it.  Now,  nothing  is  es- 
sential to  regeneration,  except  that,  without  which^ 
if  there  he  any  such  thing,  God  cannot  effect  it. 
We  must  distinguish  he t ween  an  ordinary  and  an 
essential  instrumentality.  The  products  of  the 
earth  are  the  ordinary,  the  almost  universal  means 
of  human  sustenance  ;  hut  God,  when  it  suited 
him  to  do  so,  fed  the  Israelites  with  manna  from 
heaven.  A  human  father  is  the  ordinary,  and  so 
far  as  we  hnow,  with  a  single  exception,  the  uni- 
versal, hut  not  the  essential  means  of  generation — 
Mr.  Camphell's  assumption  to  the  contrary  notwith- 
standing— for  that  holy  thing  which  was  horn  of  the 
virgin  Mary  was  conceived  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Lu. 
1:  35.  Generation  is  the  universal  means  of  rear- 
ing up  a  family  ;  hut  God  is  ahle  of  the  '  stones  to 
raise  up  children  unto  Ahraham.' "  Mat.  3:9.  The 
argument  under  consideration  assumes  the  very 
point  in  dehate — that  the  Word  is  essential  to  re- 
generation. That  the  Word — the  preaching  of  the 
Word — the  ordinances  of  Christ — the  example  and 
prayers  of  Christians — and  the  providences  of  God, 
hoth  merciful  and  severe,  are  the  ordinary,  and,  so 
far  as  we  can  judge,  the  only  means  of  regeneration, 
except  in  the  case  of  dying  infants,  and  individuals 
in  a  similar  condition,  I  concede  and  fully  teach  ; 
but  that  these  important  means  are  indispcnsahlc  to 
conversion,  I  deny,  and  Mr.  Cumjihcll  cannot  prove. 


58  CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED. 

The  fallacy  of  the  reasoning  under  consideration 
may  be  shown  by  the  application  of  the  argumen- 
tum  ad  Tiominem.  Mr.  Campbell  maintains  the 
doctrine  of  the  salvation  of  infants,  dying  in  infan- 
cy— if  he  does  not,  let  him  say  so,  and  I  will  sus- 
pend him  on  the  other  horn  of  the  dilemma.  To 
this  doctrine  we  will  apply  his  logic.  "  Whatever 
is  essential  to"  salvation  "in  any  case,  is  essential 
to  it  in  all  cases."  But  faith,  repentance,  and  bap- 
tism, as  he  teaches,  are  essential  to  salvation  in  some 
cases.  Therefore,  faith,  repentance  and  baptism 
are  essential  to  it  in  every  case.  Now,  it  is  clear 
that  Mr.  Campbell  must  renounce,  either  his  argu- 
ment, or  the  salvation  of  infants.  As  infants  can 
neither  believe,  repent,  nor  properly  be  baptized, 
and  if  these  are  essential  to  salvation,  they  cannot 
possibly  be  saved.  Clearly,  he  should  relinquish 
his  reasoning.  To  affirm  that  because  faith,  repen- 
tance and  baptism  are  essential  to  the  salvation  of 
an  intelligent,  moral  agent,  to  whom  the  Gospel  is 
preached,  it  is  essential  to  the  salvation  of  uncon- 
scious infants,  is  new  sophistry — but  sophistry  of 
precisely  the  kind  by  which  the  reviewer  opposes 
infant  regeneration. 

Mr.  Campbell  mg,intains  that  God  does  nothing 
without  means  ;  and  concludes,  therefore,  that  he 
does  not  regenerate  dying  infants.  In  Campbellisra 
Examined,  I  stated  incidentally  that  God  can  loork 
with  means  or  without  them.     This  is  a  favorite 


CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED.  59 

text  with  the  re<7iewer,  and  he  expatiates  on  it, 
frequently,  largely,  and  eloquently.  I  quote  from 
pp.  132,  133.  "  I  will  charge  myself  and  credit 
Mr.  Jeter  for  a  proof,  even  one  proof,  of  the  propo- 
sition, that  'God  worhs  toitliout  meanSy  in  creation, 
providence  or  redemption  !  Moses  forgot  to  name 
any  of  those  things  which  God  created  without 
means  !  !  But  my  friend,  Mr.  Jeter,  is  the  man 
to  set  him  right,  or  at  least,  to  fill  up  that  chasm 
in  the  account  of  creation.  Paul  says  that  '  hy 
faith  we  understand  that  the  worlds  were  framed  by 
the  luoi'd  of  God.'  This  statement  is  fatal  to  Eld. 
Jeter's  speculation.  If  God  did  not,  for  reasons 
good  and  valid,  create  anything  witliout  his  word^ 
or  without  means,  what  shall  we  say  of  the  wisdom 
or  the  presumption  of  the  affirmation,  that  '  God 
who  made  man  without  means,  can  renew  him  with- 
out means  !' 

"  I  knew  that  creatures,  even  the  mightiest, 
could  do  nothing  without  means  ;  hut  I  had  sup- 
posed, in  my  simplicity,  or,  perhaps,  in  my  "pre- 
sumption," that  God,  greater  than  creatures,  can, 
and  sometimes,  does  work  without  means.  I  had 
never  doubted  but  that  he  created  the  world — that 
he  inspired  holy  men  to  write  the  scriptures — that 
Christ  wrought  miracles — that  God  will  raise  the 
dead,  without  means  ;  and,  if  I  had  been  convinced 
that  all  these  things  have  been  done,  or  will  be 
done,  by  means,  I   should  still  h;ive  thought,  that 


60  CAMPBELLISM     RE-EXAMINED, 

he"  formed  by  mere  power  the  means,  or  instiument, 
whatever  it  may  be,  by  which  he  did,  or  will  accom- 
plish these  things.  But  it  appears  that  I  was  en- 
tirely mistaken.  "  Paul  says  that  by  faith  we  un- 
derstand that  the  worlds  were  framed  by  the  loord 
of  God."  And  this  statement,  it  seems,  is  fatal  to 
my  speculation.  I  am  surprised  that  Mr.  Camp- 
bell should  so  bewilder  himself  on  this  subject.  I 
do  not  charge  him  with  quibbling,  but  it  is  not 
easy  to  see  how  quibbling  could  be  more  futile  than 
his  reasoning.  I  can  easily  comprehend  that  words 
may  be  a  means  of  good  or  evil,  when  there  are  ears 
to  hear,  and  hearts  to  understand  them.  The 
scriptures  are  called  the  word  of  God,  not  because 
they  are  words  which  he  uttered,  but  human  words 
employed  by  the '  Spirit  of  inspiration  for  the  in- 
struction of  mankind.  They  are  appropriately 
called  the  means  of  conversion.  They  are  adapted 
to  enlighten,  awaken,  and  purify  the  hearts  of  men. 
Words  are,  literally,  significant  sounds,  formed  by 
the  human  voice.  It  is  obvious  that  words  are  as- 
cribed to  God  only  in  a  figurative  sense.  As  words 
are  indicative  of  man's  will  or  purpose  ;  God  is  said 
to  do  that  by  his  ivord,  which  he  does  by  his  will, 
or  the  direct  exercise  of  his  power.  So  the  language 
is  understood,  as  far  as  I  have  seen,  by  all  commen- 
tators and  critics,  except  Mr.  Campbell  ;  and  this 
interpretation  is  in  harmony  with  God's  incorporeal 
nature.     But  suppose,  for  the  sake  of  the  argument, 


CAMPBELLISM    RE-tXAMINED.  61 

that  the  infinite  Spirit  did,  before  language  was 
formed,  without  organs  of  speech,  and  without  air 
to  modulate,  utter  words  in  empty  space  ;  to  call 
them  the  means  of  creation  is  to  ignore  the  import 
of  the  word.  Means  signifies  an  instrument  fitted 
to  accomplish  an  end.  What  fitness  was  there  in 
words  to  effect  the  creation  of  the  world  1  There 
were  no  ears  to  listen  to  them,  no  hearts  to  be  im- 
presed  by  them,  and  on  inert  matter,  had  it  ex- 
isted, they  were  not  suited  to  act.  But  suppose, 
for  the  sake  of  the  argument,  that  God  did  utter, 
in  no  matter  what  language,  in  the  infinitude  of 
space,  words  as  a  means  of  creation.  I  would  in- 
quire. Were  these  words  uttered  by  means,  or  with- 
out them  ?  Man  utters  words  by  means  of  his 
vocal  organs.  But  has  the  infinite  Spirit  vocal  or- 
gans ?  If  he  spake,  it  must  have  been  by  the 
mere  force  of  his  will — without  organs  of  speech,  or 
any  means  whatever.  Mr.  CanipbeH's  exposition 
of  the  language  of  Paul  is  as  abhorrent  to  sound 
philosophy,  as  it  is  to  just  principles  of  philology. 
The  word  of  God,  employed  in  creation,  can  mean 
nothing  more  than  his  fiat,  or  almighty  power,  as 
Mr.  Campbell,  fated  to  contradict  himself  on  every 
important  point,  plainly  aflSrms.  "  We  know,"  he 
says,  "  that  God  is  spirit  and  not  matter — yet  he 
created  m'atter,  and  moulded  and  animated  portions 
of  it,  by  mere  volition" — yes,  ^' hy  mere  volition" — 
and,  consequently,  not  by  instrumentality. — p.  123. 


62  CAMPBELLISM   RE-EXAMINED. 

After  all,  when  the  mist  is  dispersed  from  the  sub- 
ject, the  reviewer  will  be  found  to  agree  with  me. 
T  cheerfully  admit  that  infants  dying  in  infancy, 
are  regenerated  by  the  word  of  God — not  the  written 
word,  nor  any  word  spoken  by  the  human  voice — ^but 
the  very  word  by  which  the  worlds  were  framed — the 
almighty  fiat — the  word  of  God's  power.  Heb.  I  :  3. 

But  says  Mr.  Campbell,  "  How  spirit  acts  on 
spirit,  or  mind  upon  mind,  otherwise  than  by  argu 
ments,  reasons,  or  motives,  we  have  never  met  witl 
the  man  or  book  that  could  explain  or  demonstrate 
by  any  species  of  argument,  analogy,  or  proof." 
p.  123.  This  may  be  true.  I  do  not  understand, 
much  less  can  I  explain,  how  God  "  created  matter, 
and  moulded  and  animated  portions  of  it,  by  mere 
volition."  That  he  should  act  on  mind,  "  by  mere 
volition,"  is  certainly  as  plain  and  philosophical  as 
that  he  should  thus  act  on  matter.  I  cannot 
abandon  the  truth  because  of  Mr.  Campbell's  ina- 
bility to  comprehend  it  ;  nor  will  I  insinuate  as  he 
does,  in  another  case,  with  reference  to  myself,  that 
because  "  there  are  not  a  few  things  in  science,  in 
learning  and  in  religion,"  which  he  cannot  under- 
stand, that  his  inability  indicates  a  peculiar  defect  in 
his  *^'  head  or  heart." 

I  freely  admit  that  the  regeneration  of  an  infant, 
at  death,  does  not  imply  all  that  is  comprehended 
in  the  regeneration  of  an  adult.  The  enlightenment 
of  the  mind,  repentance,  and  faith  in  Christ  are  of 


CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED.  63 

necessity  excluded*  from  infantile  regeneration  ;  but 
in  this  change  a  new,  holy  nature  is  imparted,  by 
which  the  infant  soul  is  fitted  for  the  heavenly  feli- 
city. The  salvation  of  an  infant  and  of  an  adult, 
though  differing  in  some  respects,  is  substantially 
the  same,  Eedeemed  by  the  same  blood,  sanctified 
by  the  same  spirit,  and  made  partakers  of  the  same 
inheritance,  they  will  unite  their  voices  in  the  same 
doxology,  "  Unto  him  that  hath  loved  us,  and 
washed  us  from  our  sins  in  his  own  blood,  and  made 
us  kings  and  priests  unto  Grod  and  his  Father  ;  to 
him  be  glory  and  dominion  for  ever  and  ever. 
Amen." 

I  close  this  part  of  the  discussion  with  a  reason- 
able request — that  Mr.  Campbell,  in  his  forth-com- 
ing book,  will  distinctly  inform  his  readers  that  I 
believe  and  maintain  that  the  regeneration  of  sin- 
ners is  ordinarily  effected  hy  the  Spirit  through  the 
Word,  and  that  the  only  exceptions  for  which  I  con- 
tend are  dying  infants,  and  persons  in  a  similar 
moral  condition,  and  that  they  are  regenerated  not 
hcfore,  hut  in  "  the  article  of  death."  I  make  this 
request,  because  I  am  quite  sure  that  the  review 
is  calculated  to  mislead  as  to  my  opinions  on  these 
points  those  of  his  readers  vho  have  not  examined 
my  book. 


64  CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED. 

MR.  Campbell's  new  plan  of  infant  salvation. 
The  Eefqrmer,  having  repudiated  the  popular 
doctrine,  that  dying  infants  are,  by  a  direct  influ- 
ence of  the  Holy  Spirit,  renewed,  and  fitted  foi 
heaven,  found  it  necessary  to  adopt  another  method 
of  explaining  the  process  of  their  salvation.  This 
process  is  more  fully  developed  in  the  Debate  with 
Dr,  Kice  than  anywhere  else,  I  will  permit  Mr. 
Campbell  to  furnish,  in  his  own  language,  a  full 
statement  of  it  : 

"  What  then,  let  me  ask,  is  the  philosophy  of  re- 
generation according  to  Mr,  Kice  ?  It  is  a  change 
of  heart.  There  we  agree  again.  What  sort  of 
change  ? —  not  of  the  flesh,  but  of  the  spirit — a 
change  of  the  affections,  of  the  feelings  and  sympa- 
thies of  the  soul.  Agreed  ! — a  change  so  great  that 
we  love  our  former  hates,  and  hate  our  former  loves. 
We  love  God  and  our  Saviour  supremely,  and  our 
brethren  fervently.  We  hate  Satan,  falsehood,  and 
sin.  Hence  comes  the  annihilation  of  his  hypothe- 
sis— can  an  infant  love  or  hate,  without  previous 
knowledge,  faith  or  apprehension  of  things  amiable 
and  hateful  !  !  No,  says  every  man  ;  where  there 
is  no  light,  no  understanding,  no  intelligence,  there 
can  be  no  disposition  at  all,  no  moral  feeling,  no 
change  of  affections,  no  change  of  heart ;  conse- 
quently no  infant  moral  or  spiritual  regeneration. 
It  is  impossible — it  is  inconceivable  !  No  man  can 
deiuonstrate,  illustrate,  or  prove  it."— p.  654. 


CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED.  65 

"  If  moral  disposition  l)o  a  part  of  regeneration, 
and  if  moral  disposiciou  be  to  love  God  and  hate 
Satan  ;  to  love  righteousness  and  hate*  iniquity — 
Queiy — Can  an  infant  then  be  regenerated  7  Can  it 
love  or  hate  a  being  or  a  thing,  concerning  which  it 
knows  nothing  more  than  a  rock  ?  Mr.  R.  cannot 
explain  this  difficulty,  and  it  is  fatal  to  his  theory. 
If  a  child  he  regenerate,  it  must  love  holiness  and 
hate  iniquity ;  but  this  catinot  be  without  knowl- 
edge— because  in  religion,  as  in  everything  else,  in- 
tellect pioneers  the  way,  while  the  affections  and 
the  heart  follow.  We  must  see  beauty  before  wa 
can  love  it.  We  must  see  deformity  before  we  can 
hate  it.  And,  therefore,  '  the  love  of  holiness  and 
the  hatred  of  sin'  are  impossible  to  an  infant." — 
p.  668. 

"  But  now  with  regard  to  our  physical  regenera- 
tion of  infants,  my  faith  is  in  the  Lamb  of  God,  who 
hath  taken  away  the  sin  of  the  world.  The  atone- 
ment of  the  Messiah  has  made  it  compatible  with 
God,  with  the  honor  of  his  throne  and  government, 
to  save  all  those  infants  who  die  in  Adam.  He  has 
made  an  ample  provision  for  extending  salvation 
from  all  the  consequences  of  Adam's  sin  tc  whom- 
soever he  will.  Ever  blessed  be  his  adorable  name  ! 
The  Lamb  of  God  has  borne  away  the  sin  of 
THE  world.  Infant*  then  need  that  same  kind  of 
regeneration  that  Paul,  and  Petor,  and  James,  and 
John,  and  all  saints  need-^the  entire  destruction 


66  CAMPBELLISM   RE-EXAMINED. 

of  this  body  of  sin  and  death.  The  most  perfect 
Christian  that  I  have  ever  seen,  needs  a  regenera- 
tion to  fit  Iiim  for  the  immediate  presence  of  God. 
The  infant  that  falls  asleep  in  its  mother's  bosom, 
and  after  a  few  short  days  breathes  out  its  spirit 
gently  there,  needs  no  more  change  to  fit  it  for 
Abraham's  bosom,  than  that  which  the  Spirit  of  God 
will  effect  in  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  or  in  the 
transformation  of  the  living  saints  at  the  time  of 
his  coming.  Philosophy,  reason,  and  faith,  are  alike 
silent  on  the  subject  of  any  infant  regeneration  be- 
fore death.  It  is  all  theory — idle,  empty,  suicidal 
theory.  Experience  lifts  her  ten  thousand  voices 
against  it.  Whoever  saw  a  child  regenerated  grow- 
ing up  from  birth  a  pure  and  exemplary  Christian  ! 
Persons  have  been  sanctified,  that  is,  set  apart  to 
the  Loid  from  their  birth ;  but  that  any  one  waSj 
in  our  sense  of  regeneration,  changed  in  heart  from 
birth,  reason,  revelation,  experience,  observation  de- 
pose not  ;  on  this  subject  they  are  all  as  silent  as 
death.  While,  then,  I  believe  in  the  physical  re- 
generation of  infants  after  death,  I  repudiate  their 
spiritual  or  moral  regeneration  in  life,  because  un- 
scriptural,  irrational,  and  absurd." — p.  655. 

"Man,  with  me,  when  contemplated  in  his  whole 
person  is  a  plural  unit.  He  is  one  man,  having  a 
hody,  a  eoul,  and  a  spirit.  So  both  my  philosophy 
and  my  Bible  teach.  Paul  prayed  for  the  Thessa- 
'onians  that  God  would  sanctify  them  wholly  (holo- 


CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED.  67 

teleis)  their  body,  soul,  and  spirit.  Their  pneuma, 
psuche,  soma.  Not  only  have  the  Greeks  these 
three  names,  hut  the  Latins  also.  They  had  their 
animus,  their  anima,  and  their  corjnis.  So  had  the 
Hehrews.  So  have  the  moderns,  as  we  have — bodij, 
soul,  spirit.  The  hody  is  a  mere  organized  mate- 
rial machine — the  soul  is  the  seat  of  all  the  passions 
and  instincts  of  our  nature,  and  is  intimately  con- 
nected with  the  hlood.  It  is  the  animal  life.  The 
spirit  is  a  purely  intellectual  principle,  as  intimate- 
ly connected  with  the  soul,  as  the  soul  with  the 
blood,  and  the  vital  principle.  Now  the  spirit,  or 
intellectual  principle  in  man,  is  not  the  seat  of  cor- 
ruption, or  of  depravity  abstractly,  any  more  than 
the  mere  materials  of  human  flesh.  The  under- 
standing or  intellect  is  indeed  weakened,  and  some- 
times perverted  by  the  passions,  the  animal  in- 
stincts and  impulses.  But  the  soul  is  the  great 
seat  of  all  those  corrupting  and  debasing  propen- 
sities and  affections  that  involve  the  whole  man  in 
sin  and  misery.  Man  was  not  condemned  for  reas- 
oning illogically  ;  nor  was  he  condemned  because 
he  was  either  hungry  or  thirsty,  or  had  these  ap- 
petites, but  because  captivated  by  his  passions, 
he  was  led  into  actual  rebellion.  This  is  still  the 
depravity  of  man.  His  spirit  is  enslaved  to  his  pas- 
sions and  appetites.  Its  approvings  and  disap- 
])roving8  are  all  more  or  less  contaminated,  biassed, 
and  tinged  by  these  rebellious  elements,  this  '  law 


68  CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED. 

of  sin  whicli  is  in  his  members/  warring  against 
tlie  law  of  bis  mind,  reason  and  conscience.  Now 
these  not  being  developed  in  infancy,  any  more 
than  reason  or  conscience,  places  them  under  quite 
a  different  dispensation  and  destiny.  Dying  in  that 
undeveloped  state,  they  are  not  the  subjects  of  con- 
demnation eternal,  never  having  disobeyed  God, 
nor  refused  the  Grospel.  They  need  not  those  ope- 
rations of  the  Spirit  of  which  the  theory  of  Mr, 
Eice  so  often  speaks,  and  with  which  it  is  so  replete, 
all  of  which  originated  too  in  the  brain  of  one  Saint 
Augustine. 

"  Hours  might  be  consumed  in  the  development 
of  these  principles ;  and  without  a  full  development, 
perhaps  they  ought  not  to  be  introduced.  I  have, 
indeed,  spoken  thus  far,  merely  to  show,  that  we 
have  reason  to  repudiate  the  notion  of  the  abstract, 
undefinable  metaphysical  regeneration  of*an  infant, 
as  essential  to  its  salvation .  It  only  needs,  as  before 
observed,  a  physical  regeneration  ;  a  destruction  of 
that  body  in  which  those  seeds  of  passion  and  sinful 
appetites  are  so  thickly  sown,  in  consequence  of  the 
animal  and  sensitive  having  triumphed  over  the  in- 
tellectual and  moral  man,  and  so  entailing  upon 
our  race  this  natural  proneness  to  evil.  Hence  the 
necessity  of  physical  regeneration.  The  adult  saint 
iieeds  it  as  much  as  the  infant.  '  That  law  (or 
power)  of  sin,'  in  the  members,  of  which  Paul  com- 
plained— that  'body  of  siu  and  death,'  under  which 


CAMPBELLISM   RE-EXAMINED.  69 

ije  groaned,  and  which  made  him,  in  his  own  esteem, 
a  ^wretched  man,'  must  be  destroyed.  ■  While  'the 
inward  man  delighted  in  the  law  of  God,  he  saw 
another  law  in  his  members,  warring  against  that 
law  of  his  mind,  and  bringing  him  into  captivity  to 
the  law  of  sin,  which  was  in  his  members.'  This 
will  be  destroyed  in  the  saint  before  admission  into 
heaven — and  that  is  what  I  mean  by  physical  re- 
generation ;  and  this  is  destroyed  before  develop- 
ment in  the  dying  infant,  and,  therefore,  through  the 
Lord  Messiah  ;  the  Kesurrection  and  the  Life  ; 
the  sin-atoning  Lamh  of  God; — the  Second  Adam 
— it  slumbers  in  the  bosom  of  its  Father  and  God, 
till  the  great  regeneration  of  heaven  and  earth," — 
pp.  G75,  676. 

The  above  extracts  contain  a  pretty  full  state- 
ment of  Mr.  Campbell's  views  on  the  subject  of  in- 
fant salvation  ;  and  they  are  entitled  to  careful  ex- 
amination. The  subject  is  abstruce,  and,  in  the 
absence  of  direct  revelation  to  guide  me,  I  shall 
aim  to  write  with  becoming  modesty. 

The  first  point  that  strikes  my  attention  in  Mr. 
Campbell's  scheme  of  infant  salvation  is,  that  it  is 
a  mere  assumption.  He  speciously  objects  to  the 
doctrine  of  infant  regeneration,  that  it  is  not  taught 
in  the  Sciiptures.  Its  advocates  admit  that  the 
Scripture  proof  of  it  is  not  direct  but  inferential. 
They  deem  it,  however,  clear  and  decisive.  He  re- 
jects their  doctrine,  as  a  vain  speculation,  and  sets  up 


70  CAMPBELLISM   RE-EXAMINED. 

in  opposition  to  it  a  plan  of  infant  salvation,  for 
which  the  word  of  God  furnishes  neither  direct  nor 
inferential  evidence  ;  and  which,  so  far  as  I  can 
perceive,  has  nothing  to  recommend  it  but  novelty. 
Let  us,  however,  examine  it  in  detail. 

I  have  already  remarked  that  the  denial  of  the 
regeneration  of  dying  infants  tends  to  Pelagianism, 
or  a  rejection  of  the  doctrine  of  inlierent  depravity. 
That  tendency  is,  if  I  mistake  not,  clearly  involved  in 
the  above  quotations.  I  do  not  charge  Mr.  Campbell 
with  holding  the  doctrine  of  Pelagius.  In  passages 
already  cited  from  the  Christian  System,  he  distinctly 
and  fully  endorses  the  popular  doctrine  of  man's  in- 
nate moral  corruption.  I  exculpate  him,  therefore, 
from  the  charge  of  teaching  Pelagianism  ;  but  shall 
be  able,  nevertheless,  to  show  that  the  seeds  of 
this  pernicious  system  are  wrapped  up  in  his 
scheme.  He  may  not,  I  presume,  he  does  not  per- 
ceive the  consequences  of  his  positions  ;  but  still 
they  are  of  Pelagian  tendency  ;  and  it  may  be  well 
to  point  out  this  tendency  that  he  may  have  an 
opportunity  of  counteracting  it  in  his  promised 
book. 

In  the  foregoing  extracts,  Mr.  Campbell,  if  I  un- 
derstand him,  teaches  that  man  has  a  hbdy,  a  soul 
and  a  spirit — that  the  body  is  a  mere  organized 
material  machine^-that  the  soul  is  the  seat  of  the  pas- 
sions and  instincts  of  our  nature,  and  is  intimately 
connected  with  the  blood — that  the  spirit  is  a  pure- 


CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED.  71 

ly  intellectual  principle — that  depravity  exists  pri- 
marily in  the  soul,  and  not  in  the  spirit,  any  more 
than  in  the  mere  materials  of  human  flesh — that 
the  spirit,  or  higher  nature  of  man,  can  he  defiled 
only  through  the  passions  and  appetites  of  the 
soul — that  these,  not  heing  developed  in  infancy, 
the  spirit  escapes  conception — and  that  the  infant, 
dying  before  the  contamination  of  the  spirit,  is 
placed  under  "  quite  a  different  destiny" — needs  no 
moral  renovation — but  will  be  saved  "  a  physical 
regeneration,"  or  the  resurrection  from  the  dead, 
just  as  the  saints  will  be  saved,  "  The  spirit — is 
not  the  seat  of  corruption  or  depravitjj  abstractly, 
any  more  than  the  mere  materials  of  human  flesh." 
"  But  the  soul  is  the  great  seat  of  all  those  corrupt- 
ing and  debasing  propensities  and  affections  which 
involve  the  whole  man  in  sin  and  misery."  It  would 
seem  then  that  the  spirit  is  not  corrupt  abstractly, 
or  by  itself,  but  only  through  the  impure  afiections 
of  the  soul  ;  and  these  "  not  being  developed  in  in- 
fancy, any  more  than  reason  or  conscience,  places 
them,"  (infants,  I  presume,  though  the  pronoun 
has  no  antecedent,)  "  under  quite  a  ditferent  dis- 
pensation and  destiny."  "  Dying  in  that  2indevelop- 
ed  state — they  need  not  the  operations  of  the  Spirit." 
An  inspired  apostle  distinguishes  between  "  spi- 
rit, and  soul,  and  body  ;"  but  the  precise  distinc- 
tion between  •svzuixa^  spirit,  and  ■^'^X'^,,  soul,  which 
he  intended,  it  is  n^t  easy  to  perceive.     The  terms 


72  TAMPBELLISM   RE-EXAMINED. 

seem  to  be  used  frequently  in  the  New  Testament, 
as  tlieir  corresponding  terms  are  among  us,  in  the 
same  sense.  We  cannot,  perhaps,  better  define 
them  than  by  saying  that  spirit  denotes  the  intel- 
lectual, and  soul  the  emotional  nature  of  man  : 
but  these  are  not  separate,  or  separable  parts. 
but  the  same  part  contemplated  under  different 
aspects.  Be  this  as  it  may,  the  spirit  of  man  is, 
undoubtedly,  his  highest  nature.  Spirit  is  placed 
by  the  apostle  Paul  before  soul  and  body.  Thess. 
5  :  23.  It  is  the  inward  eye  of  man.  "For  what 
man  knoweth  the  things  of  a  man,  save  the  spirit 
of  man  which  is  in  him  ?"  Mr.  Campbell  assigns 
to  the  spirit  a  pre-eminence  over  the  soul  and  the 
body.  The  spirit  is  the  responsible,  and  controll- 
ing agent — the  seat  of  the  understanding,  memory, 
will  and  conscience.  It  does  not  act  independently 
of  the  soul,  nor  of  the  body,  while  it  is  incarnate, 
but  is  appointed  to  govern  them.  If  there  is  de- 
pravity in  man,  it  is  in  his  spirit.  We  are  taught 
that  bodiless  spirits  may  be  corrupt.  We  read  of 
"  seducing  spirits,"  "  a  foul  spirit,"  and  "  lying 
spirits."  Satan  is  a  depraved  spirit.  I  can  see  no 
reason  why  embodied  spirits  may  not  be  corrupt. 
The  Bible  informs  us  that  there  is  a,  Jilthiness  of  the 
spirit,  as  well  as  of  the  flesh.  2  Cor.  7:1.  Into 
some  sins  man  is  seduced  by  the  solicitations  of  the 
flesh — the  animal  nature — but  others  have  their 
jri.  in  in  the  spirit.     Pride,  ambition,  envy,  malice, 


CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED.  73 

and  such  things,  arc  the  filthiness  of  the  spirit. 
Satan  infuses  his  evil  dispositions  into  the  spirit 
of  men.  "  Ye  are  of  your  father,  the  devil,"  said 
Jesus,  to  the  wicked  Jews,  "  and  the  lusts  of  your 
father  ye  will  do."  What  I  maintain  is,  that  man's 
spirit — his  highest  nature — the  indestructible  inner 
man — is,  at  birth,  and  undoubtedly  to  the  develop- 
ment of  the  "  passions  and  appetites"  depraved.  By 
what  authority,  of  revelation  or  of  reason,  Mr.  C. 
maintains  that  the  spirit  is  free  from  sin  until  it  is 
perverted  by  the  propensities  of  the  soul,  he  has  not 
informed  us.  He  will,  perhaps,  do  so  in  his  expect- 
ed volume.  It  may  be  well  for  him  to  consider  the 
import  of  the  Saviour's  words,  "  That  which  is 
born  ofthefiesh  is  fiesh."  Is  not  the  whole  man 
body,  soul  and  spirit,  born  of  the  flesh  ?  and  are 
not  all  involved  in  a  common  corruption  and  ruin  ? 
I  have  not  yet  disposed  of  this  matter — Mr. 
Campbell  assumes  a  principle  which,  if  carried  to 
its  legitimate  result,  is  utterly  subversive  of  the 
doctrine  of  infant  depravity.  "  Where  there  is  no 
light,"  he  says,  "  no  understanding,  no  intelligence, 
there  can  be  no  disposition  at  all,  no  moral  feeling, 
no  change  of  affections,  no  change  of  heart  ;  conse- 
quently no  infant  moral  or  spiritual  regeneration." 
Again,  he  writes,  "We  must  see  beauty  before  we  can 
love  it.  We  must  see  deformity  before  we  can  hate  it. 
And,  therefore,  *  the  love  of  holiness  and  the  hatred 
of  sin'  are  impossible  to  an  infant."     According  to 


74  CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED. 

this  theory,  knowledge  must  precede  all  dispositions, 
good  or  bad,  all  moral  bias,  right  or  wrong,  "  In 
religion,  as  in  every  thing  else,  intellect  pioneers 
the  way,  while  the  affections  and  the  heart  follow." 
These  statements  are  incompatible  with  the  doc- 
trine of  inherent  corruption.  What  is  depravity 
but  an  evil  disposition  or  tendency  of  the  heart  ? 
Some  moral  quality  of  the  inner  man — of  the  soul 
and  spirit — which  inclines  it  to  do  evil  ?  In  the 
infant  the  moral  quality,  or  disposition,  is  latent, 
undeveloped,  but  real  and  innate,  depending  not  on 
knowledge,  education,  or  circumstances.  Just  as 
certainly  as  the  young  mind  is  developed,  it  will, 
impelled  by  this  evil  disposition,  hate  holiness  and 
love  sin.  We  find  in  the  history  of  the  primeval 
father  of  mankind  the  illustration  and  proof  of  this 
position.  God  created  man  in  his  own  image,  and 
that  image  consisted  in  "  righteousness  and  true 
'holiness."  Or,  as  Mr.  Campbell  expresses  it,  "  Man, 
then,  in  his  natural  state,  was  not  merely  an  ani- 
mal, but  an  intellectual,  moral,  pure,  and  holy 
being," — Christian  System,  p.  26.  If  man  was 
created  lioly,  then  it  follows  that  knowledge  is  not 
indispensable  to  the  existence  of  holiness.  Adam 
was  holy  in  the  very  moment  of  his  creation.  His 
moral  constitution  was  sound.  His  dispositions  were 
all  turned  in  the  right  direction.  When  light 
dawned  on  his  mind,  he  rejoiced  in  truth,  loved  what 
was  lovely,   chose  what  was    good,    and  did  what 


CAMPBELLI8M    RE-EXAMINED.  75 

was  right.  It  is  true,  that  the  conscious,  joyous 
exercise  of  the  affections  was  consequent  on  the 
acquisition  of  knowledge  ;  but  it  was  the  readiness, 
or  tendency  of  the  affectiops  to  flow  in  the  right 
direction  that  constituted  his  holiness.  Now,  it  is 
the  opposite  disposition — the  readiness  of  the  affec- 
tions to  pursue  the  wrong  direction — that  consti- 
tutes depravity  ;  and  this  disposition^  dormant  in 
infants,  is  certain,  if  their  faculties  are  unfolded,  to 
be  aroused  into  active  exercise.  Now,  I  readily 
grant  that  by  Mr.  Campbell's  theory,  he  fairly  pre- 
cludes the  necessity,  and,  indeed,  the  possibility  of 
"  infant  moral  or  spiritual  regeneration  ;"  but  in 
evading  this  necessity,  he  aims  a  serious  blow  at 
the  foundation  of  Christianity.  This  reasoning 
when  fairly  carried  out,  runs  thus — Where  there 
is  no  knowledge,  there  is  no  disposition,  or  moral 
character — where  there  is  no  disposition,  there  is  no 
depravity — where  there  is  no  depravity,  there  is 
no  need  of  spiritual  regeneration — and,  what  is 
equally  clear,  no  need  of  an  atonement.  Infants 
have  no  knowledge,  consequently  no  disposition — no 
depravity — no  need  of  regeneration — or  of  an  atone- 
ment. Where  then,  so  far  as  infants  are  concerned,  is 
the  necessity  of  Christianity  ?  I  know  Mr.  Camp- 
bell will  repudiate  these  consequences,  but  they  are 
b.  und  to  his  principles  by  hooks  of  steel. 

It  is  now  time   that  we    should   examine  more 
ch  Bcly  Mr.  Campbell's  theory  of  infant  salvation — 


76  CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED. 

a  theory  that  seems  to  have  been  adopted,  from  no 
reverence  for  the  teaching  of  revelation,  but  merely 
to  evade  the  necessity  of  admitting  the  regeneration 
of  dying  infants. 

Having  shown,  as  he  supposes,  that  the  soul, 
which  is  "  intimately  connected  with  the  blood,"  is 
primarily  the  seat  of  depravity,  and  that  the  Spirit, 
"  a  purely  intellectual  principle,"  is  free  from  sin, 
until  the  "corrupting  and  debasing  propensities  and 
affections"  of  the  soul  are  developed,  which  de- 
velopment cannot  occur  in  infancy — he  thus  unfolds 
his  scheme  of  infant  salvation.  "  We  have  reason 
to  repudiate  the  notion  of  the  abstract,  undefinable, 
metaphysical  regeneration,  of  an  infant  as  essential 
to  its  salvation.  It  only  needs  a  jy^iysical  regenera- 
tion; a  destruction  of  that  body  in  which  those 
seeds  of  passion  and  sinful  appetites  are  so  thickly 
sown, — The  adult  saint  needs  it  as  much  as  the 
infant."  "  Infants  then  need  that  same  kind  of 
regeneration  that  Paul,  and  Peter,  and  James,  and 
John,  and  all  saints  need — the  entire  destruction 
of  this  body  of  sin  and  death."  What  Mr.  Camp- 
bell means  by  "  physical  regeneration" — a  phrase 
which  I  am  surprised  to  see  used  by  one  whose 
avowed  mission  is  the  restoration  of  a  pure  speech — 
he  explains  in  the  following  language. — "  The  in- 
fant that  falls  asleep  in  its  mother's  bosom,  and 
after  a  few  short  days  breathes  out  its  spirit  gently 
there,  needs  no  more  change  to  fit  it  for  Abraham's 


CAMPBEILISM   RE-EXAMINED.  77 

bosom  than  that  which  the  Spirit  of  God  will  effect 
in  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  or  in  the  transform- 
ation of  the  living  saints  at  the  time  of  His  com- 
ing"— Christ's  coming,  I  suppose  he  means,  though 
the  "  Spirit  of  God"  is  the  grammatical  antecedent 
of  the  pronoun. 

For  this  scheme  of  infant  salvation,  the  reader 
hardly  needs  to  be  informed,  Mr.  Campbell  is  in- 
debted solely  to  human  invention.  It  is  as  much  a 
work  of -imagination  as  any  tale  of  fictian.  From 
the  Scriptures  it  receives  no  support,  either  direct 
or  inferential.  It  has  no  basis  in  sownd  philoso- 
phy. The  doctrine  that  man  is  at  birth  depraved 
in  his  spiritual  nature,  and  that  he  needs  a  spiritual 
renovation,  is  the  dictate  of  philosophy  as  well  as  of 
revelation.  Mr.  Campbell  does,  indeed,  furnish  a 
comparison,  but  a  most  unfortunate  one,  in  support 
of  his  scheme.  "  Infants  need  the  same  kind  of  re- 
generation that  Paul,  and  Peter,  and  James,  and 
John,  &c.,  need."  The  Scriptures  teach  that  the 
saints  at  death,  freed  from  bodily  appetites  and 
passions,  will  enter  into  Paradise.  For  them  "to 
bo  absent  from  the  body  (is)  to  be  present  with  the 
Lord."  There  is,  however,  an  essential  and  most 
important  difference  between  dying  saints  and  dy- 
ing infants.  The  saints  have  in  them  a  principle 
of  life — of  spiritual,  divine,  eternal  life.  "  Who- 
soever," says  Jcsns,  "  drinketh  of  the  water  that  I 
shall  give   him  shall  never  thirst  :    but  the  water 


78  CAMPBELLISM   RE-EXAMINED. 

that  I  shall  give  him  shall  be  in  him  a  well  of  water 
springing  up  into  everlasting  life."  When  the 
saints  die  they  find,  in  heaven,  society,  occupation, 
and  enjoyments  for  which  they  have  been  fitted  by 
regeneration,  and  a  course  of  moral  discipline.— 
Freed  from  the  encumbrance  of  their  bodies,  and 
the  temptations  arising  from  their  connexion  with 
them,  their  spiritual  life  is  fully  developed  and  ma- 
tured. But  what  agreement  is  there  between  the 
condition  pf  dying,  regenerated  men,  and  dying,  un- 
regenerated  infants.  Surely,  the  dying  infant  needs 
a  regeneration  difi'erent  from  that  of  the  dying 
saint — not  merely  of  physical,  or  bodily,  but  a  moral, 
or  spiritual  regeneration.  The  infant  has,  as  Mr. 
Campbell  teaches,  in  one  place,  a  sinful  nature,  and 
it  cannot,  without  a  moral  renovation,  be  otherwise 
than  corrupt,  either  before  or  after  death. 

To  one  of  two  conclusions,  Mr.  Campbell  is,  by 
his  theory,  fairly  driven. 

First — Infarcts  are.  not  sinful ,  in  their  higher, 
immortal  nature,  previous  to  the  development  of  the 
corrupt  propensities  of  tlieir  inferior,  mortal  nature ; 
and  consequently,  they  need,  in  the  evangelical  sense, 
no  salvation.  This  conclusion  is  irresistible.  Where 
there  is  no  sin,  there  can  be  salvation.  Christ 
came  to  save  sinners,  and  only  sinners.  If  infants 
are  not  sinners,  they  may,  indeed,  be,  as  Mr.  Camp- 
bell calls  it,  physically  regenerated,  but  they  can- 
not be  saved  bv  the  blood  of  Christ. 


CAMPBELLISM   RE-EXAMINED.  79 

Secondly — If  sinful  infants  are,  in  any  case,  fit- 
ted for  heaven  hy  physical  regeneration,  sinful  adults 
may  he  prepared  for  it  hy  the  same  process.  If 
the  resurrection  of  the  dead  can  cure  the  spiritual 
maladies  of  an  infant,  why  may  not  the  spiritual 
maladies  of  an  adult  be  cured  by  the  same  process  ? 
If  this  reasoning  is  false,  Mr.  Campbell  cannot  ob- 
ject to  it.  I  will  refresh  his  memory  by  recalling 
his  own  method  of  reasoning.  "  Whatever  is  essen- 
tial to  regeneration  in  any  case,  is  essential  in  all 
cases.  *  *  *  If  it  be  a  new  heart  given,  a  new  life 
communicated,  it  is  accomplished  in  all  cases,  as 
generation  is,  by  the  same  agency  and  instrumen- 
tality." Now,  according  to  the  theory  under  dis- 
cussion, sinful  infants,  dying  in  inilmcy,  are  fitted 
for  "Abraham's  bosom,"  by  ?i.  physical  regeneration  ; 
and  as  whatever  is  necessary  to  produce  this  fitness, 
in  any  case,  is  necessary  in  every  case  ;  it  follows, 
with  logical  certainty,  that  all  who  are  fitted  for 
"Abraham's  bosom,"  are  fitted  for  it,  as  dying  in- 
fants are,  by  a  physical  regeneration.  Mr.  Camp- 
bell is  welcome  to  either  horn  of  the  dilemma.  Take 
which  he  may,  he  will  find  himself  involved  in  se- 
rious difficulties;  from. which,  howerer,  he  is  well 
fitted  to  extricate  himself. 


30  CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED. 

THE    IDENTITY    OF    BAPTISM,    REGENERATION    AND 
CONVERSION. 

In  his  various  works,  Mr.  Campbell  has  earnestly, 
and  unequivocally  insisted  that,  in  Scriptural  use, 
the  above  words  have  precisely  the  same  import. 
In  Carapbellism  Examined,  pp.  191-216,  I  endeav- 
ored, after  acquitting  him  of  the  charge  of  holding, 
in  its  popular  sense,  the  doctrine  of  baptismal 
regeneration,  to  prove  "  that  neither  the  term  re- 
gciicration,  nor  conversion,  nor  any  equivalent  term, 
nor  the  Gy^eelc  words  which  they  properly  represent, 
nor  any  of  their  cognates,  are  ever  used  in  the  Scrip- 
tures to  denote  baptism." — p.  199.  I  have  the 
most,  unwavering  conviction  that  this  position  was 
sustained  by  incontrovertible  arguments.  On  this 
point,  at  least,  I  did  sincerely  hope  that  Mr.  Camp- 
bell wc)uld  confess  his  error,  and  return  to  the  Scrip- 
tural use  of  terms  ;  but  I  was  disappointed.  Hav- 
ing taken  his  position,  he  is  exceedingly  reluctant 
to  abandon  it.  Well,  what  has  ho  done  ?  He  has 
not  so  much  as  made  an  attempt  to  answ^er  the  ar- 
guments by  which  I  sustained  my  position,  and 
showed  that  his  use  of  these  ternis  is  incorrect.  Let 
us  hear  what  he  isays.  "  We  will  proceed  to  notice 
his  (Mr.  Jeter's)  declarations  on  Christian  Baptism. 
We  say  his  declarations,  for  on  this  subject  he  has 
not  adduced  the  Christian  doctrine" — ^certainly,  not 
the  doctrine  of  the  Christian  System — "but  his 
own   conceptions  of  it,   and  speculations  upon  it. 


CAMIBELLISM   RE-EXAMINED.  81 

Prior  to  any  analysis  of  his  dogmata,  we  must 
claim  the  right  to  complain  of  his  garbled  quota- 
tions, from  '  Christianity  Restored,'  and  his  calling 
my  quotations  '  unintelligible  jargon.'  That  is,  to 
be  sure,  quite  complimentary  to  me,  and  quite  as 
much  so  to  the  diction  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  whose 
language  we  have  employed." — Mill.  Har.,  p.  438. 
There  are  three  counts  in  this  indictment — 
First — That  I  made  "  garbled  quotations  from 
Christianity  Restored."  Mr,  Campbell  furnishes  an 
extract  of  two  pages  from  that  work  as  "  an  expo- 
sition alike  of  his  (my)  taste,  and  of  his  (my)  un- 
derstanding." He  might  with  equal  propriety  have 
printed  a  dozen  pages  for  the  purpose.  Let  the  in- 
telligent reader  compare  the  quotations  in  my  book, 
p.  203,  with  the  context  given  in  the  review,  and 
satisfy  himself  of  the  correctness  of  my  "  taste," 
and  the  soundness  of  my  "  understanding,"  in  ma- 
king my  selections.  I  ask  nothing  more.  Will  Mr. 
Campbell  pretend  that  the  passages  as  in  my  book 
do  not  bear  precisely  the  same  meaning  which  they 
bear  in  his?  Having  disposed  of  the  charge  of 
garbling  in  another  place,  I  will  not  dwell  on  it 
here. 

Secondly — That  I  called  Mr,  Campbell's  language 
"  unintcUUjhle  jargon"  To  this  count  I  must  plead 
Guilty.  I  ought,  perhaps,  in  vievr  of  his  age,  learn- 
ing and  reputation,  to  apologize  for  the  use  of  such 
tin  epithet.     But  "great  men  are  not  always  wise." 


82  CAMPBELLISM   BE-EXAMINED. 

If  Ihe  terms,  however,  are  libelous,  I  may  be  per- 
mitted to  plead  their  truthfulness  in  abatement  of 
damages.  Let  us  re-examine  the  passages  pro- 
nounced to  be  "  unintelligible  jargon."  "  Persons 
are  begotten  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  impregnated 
with  the  Word,  and  born  of  water."  It  is  admit- 
ted that  physiologically  there  is  a  distinction  between 
begotten  and  hoo'n;  but  Mr.  Campbell,  and  every 
tryo  in  Greek,  know  that  these  terras  in  the  New 
Testament  represent  precisely  the  same  word. — 
Whether  believers  are  said  to  be  "  begotten  of  God," 
or  "born  of  God,"  depends  merely  on  the  taste  of 
•the  translators.  Whosoever,  in  Scripture  phrase- 
ology, is  "  begotten  of  God,"  is  "  born  of  God." 
When  a  person,  according  to  Mr,  Campbell's  theory, 
is  '•  begotten,"  or,  which  is  precisely  the  same  thing, 
horn  of  God,  he  is  next  impregnated  by  the  Word. 
Conformably  to  physiological  laws  the  mother  and 
not  the  foetus  is  impregnated.  But  Mr,  Campbell 
inverts  the  order  of  nature,  and  insists  that  "  per- 
sons begotten  of  God  (are)  impregnated  by  the 
Word  ;"  and  they  are  begotten,  and  become  preg- 
nant, before  they  are  "  born  of  water,"  "  Now,  as 
soon  as,  and  not  before,"  he  affirms,  "  a  disciple, 
who  has  been  begotten,"  that  is,  born  of  God,  "  is 
born  of  water" — immersed — "he  is  born  of  God,  or 
of  the  Spirit."  Who  has  ever  noted  a  greater  con- 
fusion of  metaphors,  or  a  greater  obscurity  of  con- 
ception.    If  this  is  not  jargon,  I  have  misconceived 


'AMPBELLISM    RE-EXAM. NED.  83 

the  meaning  of  the  term,  and  how  the  extended  con- 
text, quoted  by  Mr.  Campbell,  mends  the  matter, 
I  do  not  perceive.  I  am  constrained  to  admit  that 
it  is  to  me  "yet  unintelligible  Jargon." — p,  438. 

Thirdly — That  I  was  quite  complimentary,  in  an 
ironical  sense,  "to  the  diction  of  the  Holy  Spirit." 
To  this  count  I  plead,  Not  guilty.  For  the  "  dic- 
tion of  the  Holy  Spirit,"  I  would  cherish  the  most 
profound  reverence.  If  Mr.  Campbell  will  only 
point  to  the  chapter  and  verse  in  which  the  lan- 
guage is  recorded,  I  will  promptly  retract  all  that 
I  have  written  on  the  subject.  It  is  bad  for  him  to 
use  unintelligible  language  himself,  but  to  make 
the  Holy  Spirit  responsible  for  it  is  far  worse. 

Mr.  Campbell  having  made  a  quotation  "  from 
the  Book  of  Common  prayer  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, showing,"  as  he  conceived,  "  unequivocally 
that  the  learned  Doctors  of  that  church  used  the 
words  regeneration  and  baptism  as  synonymous," 
adds — "  This  '  unintelligible  jargon '  belongs  to 
the  Church  of  England,  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church  of  the  United  States,  and  to  the  Presbyte- 
rian formulas,  confessions  of  faith,  and  catechisms.'* 
The  extract  from  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer, 
seems  to  me  to  teach  the  doctrine  of  baptismal 
regeneration — of  a  spiritual  renovation  through 
the  influence  of  baptism — which  I  understand  Mr. 
Campbell  to  repudiate  ;  but,  certainly,  not  the 
identity   of  baptism    and    regeneration,    much  less 


84'  CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED. 

that  a  disciple  wlio  is  begotten,  or  born  of  God, 
is  not  born  of  God,  until  he  is  baptized  ;  and 
if  it  is  taught  in  any  "  formulas,  confessions  of 
faith,  or  catechisms  of  the  Presbyterian,"  or  any 
other  church,  orthodox,  or  hetorodox,  Latin,  Greek, 
or  Protestant,  I  have  not  seen  it. 

"  These  extracts,"  says  Mr,  Campbell,  referring 
to  the  quotations  by  which  I  showed  that  he  taught 
the  identity  of  baptism,  regeneration,  and  conver- 
sion, "  are  true  and  faithful ;  and  in  their  context- 
ual import  I  do  not,  I  would  not,  change  one  word. 
And  yet  they  are  made  to  do  me  the  greatest  injus- 
tice— just  as  much  as  if,  while  maintaining  that  the 
Scriptures  teach  that  '  a  man  is  justified  by  faith,' 
some  envious,  querulous,  discontent,  ft)  say  nothing 
of  his  pride  of  opinion,  or  vanity  of  mind,  should 
quote,  '  was  not  Abraham  our  father  justified  by 
works'  "  ! !  Yes,  the  Father  of  all  believers  was 
justified  hy  works  !  !  James  11:3.  Again  :  Paul 
says,  '  tlie  doers  of  the  law  shall  be  justified.  Kom. 
11  :  3.  Again  ;  Paul  says,  '  Being  now  justified  by 
his  blood,  we  shall  be  saved,'  Eom,  7  :  9.  Once 
more,  we  are  said  to  be  'justified  freely  by  his 
grace.'  Tit.  3:7.  What  can  we  think — what 
could  we  think  of,  the  man  that  would  quote  any  of 
these  passages  as  conflicting  with  justification  by 
faith  .?  And  need  we  add,  what  can  we  think,  or 
what  need  we  say,  of  Mr,  Jeter  and  his  New  York 
encomiasts.?' — }>.  455. 


CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED.  85 

The  above  is  a  favorite  line  of  defence  with  Mr. 
Campbell — he  frequently  resorts  to  it.  It  amounts 
to  this — In  the  Scriptures,  and  in  my  writings, 
there  are  seeming  contradictions,  but  they  may  all 
be  reconciled.  It  is  conceded  that  the  Scriptures, 
written  by  different  penmen,,  at  different  times,  un- 
der different  circumstances,  and  for  different  purpo- 
ses, contain  some  statements  which  are  apparently 
inconsistent,  but  which  are  easily  harmonized  by 
sound  principles  of  interpretation.  They  have 
been  satisfactorily  reconciled  by  the  labors  of  the 
learned.  But  it  does  not  follow  that  because  the 
contradictions  of  the  Scriptures  are  seeming,  those 
of  Mr.  Campbell  are  not  real.  For  my  own  part,  I 
have  far  greater  confidence  in  the  intelligence,  dis- 
crimination and  stability  of  the  inspired  writers  than 
I  have  in  those  of  the  Bethany  reviewer.  Besides, 
the  cases  are  not  parallel.  The  different  state- 
ments of  the  apostles  concerning  justification  are 
apparently,  but  not  really  contradictory — they  have 
been  reconciled—butthe  contradictions  in  Mr.  Camp- 
bell's books  are  real,  not  imaginary — in  no  contex- 
tual light,  and  by  no  just  laws  of  interpretation,  can 
human  ingenuity  harmonize  them,  either  with  them- 
selves, or  the  teaching  of  Revelation.  Had  Paul,  in 
the  same  epistle,  affifmed,  in  one  place,  that  we  are 
justified  by  faith,  and,  in  another  place,  that  we  are 
not  justified  by  faith — a  supposition  wholly  incompa- 
tible with  his  plenary  inspiration — the  contradiction 


86  CAMPBELLISM   EE- EXAMINED. 

would  have  been  of  the  kind  with  which  Mr.  Camp- 
bell's  writings  abound.  Take  a  proof  of  this  remark 
from  the  review  under  consideration.  He  writes, 
p.  185,  "  Regeneration  is  found  but  twice  in  the 
whole  Bible — Old  Testament  and  New.  Once  it 
indicates  the  resurrection  epoch,  or  the  announce- 
ment of  the  reign  of  Christ,  and  once  Christian 
baptism."  Reader,  mark  this — "  Regeneration 
indicates  once  Christian  baptism."  He  refers  to 
Titus  3  ;  5.  Now  turn  over  to  p.  308,  and  read 
— "  Baptism  is  once  called  in  the  epistles,  not  re- 
generation, but  '  the  loashing  of  the  new  birth,'  or 
of  regeneration.  It  was  not  by  Paul  presented  as 
the  new  birth,  but  only  the  washing  of  those 
already  born  by  the  Spirit."  "  Regeneration  indi- 
cates Christian  baptism"  says  Mr.  Campbell : 
"  baptism  is  not  regeneration,"  say&  Mr.  Campbell. 
I  may,  surely,  be  excused  from  any  farther  examina- 
tion of  this  subject. 

PROGKESSIVE    SANOTIFICATIOISr. 

"  I  am  really  sorry,"  says  Mr.  Campbell,  "  to 
have  to  expose  a  second  radical  error  in  his  (Mr. 
Jeter's)  second  proof,  more  serious,  though  less  pal- 
pable, than  the  first.  His  words  are  :  '  My  second 
proof  is  derived  from  the  nature  of  sanctification. 
It  is  progressive  holiness.  *  *  *  Elder  Jeter  needs 
to  pray  save  me  from  my  friends  !  !  Sanctification, 
progressive  holiness  !  !  !    Why,  my  dear  doctor,  did 


CAMPBELLISM   RE-EXAMINED.  87 

you  not  consult  your  Greek  Concordance  !  We 
have  the  word  sanctijication  but  Jive  times  in  the 
New  Testament,  and  the  word  holiness  also  h\xt  five 
times,  and  one  and  the  same  word,  Jiagiasmos,  repre- 
sents them  both.  *  *  *  No  state  in  the  universe — 
paternal,  maternal,  filial,  conjugal,  political,  eccle- 
siastic— changes.  They  terminate.  A  child  of  one 
day  and  of  one  hundred  years,  are  equally  children. 
There  is  no  progression  in  relations.  *  *  *  Sanc- 
tification  is,  therefore,  no  more  than  justification,  a 
work  of  progression.  Whenever  a  believer  is  bap- 
tized, he  is — sanctified," 

The  intelligent  reader,  by  turning  back  to  pp. 
260,  261,  will  find  that  the  above  extract  is  almost 
a  verbatim  repetition  of  the  note  recorded  there. 
It  would  seem  from  this  repetition  of  his  remarks 
and  the  batallions  of  exclamatory  notes  with  which 
they  are  escorted,  that  Mr.  Campbell  deems  them 
exceedingly  important.  Well,  I  acknowledge  my- 
self indebted  to  him  for  the  information  that  the 
Greek  word  hagiasmos  is  rendered  sometimes  Jioli- 
ness,  and  sometimes  sanctification.  Overlooking 
this  obvious  truth,  I  adopted  a  slightly  inaccurate 
definition  of  the  term  sanctification.  I  stated  that 
sanctification  is  progressive  holiness.  It  is,  indeed, 
progressive,  and  is,  of  course,  progressive  holiness, 
but  the  last  word  is  redundant.  It  is  sufficient  to 
say  that  sanctification  is  progressive.  So  much  in 
deference  to  the  criticism  of  the  reviewer.   Now,  let 


88  CAMPBELLISM    RE-EX  A.MINED. 

US  examine  his  theology.  He  teaches  that  sanctifi- 
cation  denotes  a  state,  by  which  he  means  a  relation, 
"  There  is  no  progression  in  relations."  I  may  not 
clearly  understand  what  he  means  by  state  or  rela- 
tion ;  but  it  i%,  I  think,  clear  that  hagiasmos,  and 
its  cognates,  have  reference,  not  to  any  legal  state  or 
relation,  but  to  moral  qualities.  The  word  signi- 
fies "  separated,  consecrated."  The  believer  is  se- 
parated, consecrated  to  God.  This  consecration 
involves  moral  purity.  The  Saviour  says,  "  Bless- 
ed are  the  pure  in  heart,  for  they  shall  see  God  ;" 
and  Paul  does  but  repeat  this  truth  when  he 
writes,  "  Follow  holiness — without  which  no  man 
shall  see  the  Lord."  Consecration  to  God  may  be 
partial  or  entire — and,  consequently,  may  progress 
from  one  measure  to  another.  This  has  certainly 
been  the  prevailing,  almost  universal,  doctrine  of 
theologians.  But,  says  the  reviewer,  "  Sanctifica- 
tion  is,  no  more  than  justification,  a  loorh  of  pro- 
gression." It  always  affords  me  sincere  pleasure  to 
be  able  to  adduce  in  support  of  my  teaching  the 
authority  of  some  renowned  Biblicist,  whose  name 
will  secure  for  him  an  influence  to  which  I  can  lay  no 
claim.  That  pleasure  I  now  enjoy.  I  quote  the 
words  of  Mr.  Alexander  Camj bell,  the  Bethany 
Keformer,  in  opposition  to  the  position  of  the  re- 
viewer. "  Sanctification  in  one  point  of  view,  is 
unquestionably  a  progressive  work.  To  sanctify  is 
to  set  apart  ;  this  may  be  rJone  in  a  moment,  and 


CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED.  89 

SO  far  as  state  or  relation  is  concerned,  it  is  as  in- 
stantaneous as  baptism.  But  there  is  the  forma- 
tion of  a  holy  character  as  well  as  a  holy  state.  The 
formation  of  such  a  character  is  the  work  of  means  ; 
Holy  Father,"  said  Jesus,  "  sanctify  them,  (my  dis- 
ciples,) through  the  truth  ;  thy  word  is  truth."  Of 
the  sanctification  of  state,  I  know  nothing,  and  be- 
lieve nothing.  It  was  of  that  sanctification  which 
consists  in  moral  purity — the  proper  ordering  of  the 
affections  and  conduct  towards  God — the  only  sanc- 
tification, so  far  as  I  can  perceive,  revealed  in  the 
Bible — that  I  affirmed  progression  ;  and  on  this 
point  Mr.  Campbell  fully  concurs  with  me.  This 
being  established,  my  argument  in  the  premises  re- 
mains, intact.     See  Camp.  Examined,  p.  171. 

MISCELLANIES. 

It  would  be  easy  to  pass  over  all  the  Nos.  of  the 
review,  and  point  out  mistakes,  and  sophistries, 
which  abound  on  almost  every  page,  but  the  labor 
would  be  bootless.  I  will,  however,  notice  very 
briefly  a  few  more  of  them. 

A  false  quotation. — Mr.  Campbell  maintained 
that  the  church  of  Christ,  described  Eph.  4  :  6,  is  a 
body — not  a  mass,  but  an  organized,  beautiful  and 
visible  body — that  he  has  but  one  body — and  that 
this  body  is  not  the  Romish,  Episcopalian,  Presby- 
terian, Methodist,  or  Baptist  body — but,  he  would 
have  us  to  infer   'hat  it  is  the  body  embracing  tho 


90  CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED. 

"  ancient  Grospel,"  or  the  "  Disciples."  In  tlie  ex- 
amination of  this  high  claim,  I  inquired,  "  If  the 
party  adopting  the  peculiar  views  of  Mr.  C,  is 
really  the  body  of  Christ,  where  was  his  body  before 
the  light  shone  from  Bethany  T' — Camp.  Ex.  p. 
41.  The  question  was  important  and  respectful. 
Believing,  as  I  did,  that  the  body  of  Christ  is  spirit- 
ual and  invisible,  I  was  under  no  necessity  of  at- 
tempting the  solution  of  the  question.  But  Mr. 
Campbell  maintaining  that  the  body  is  organized 
and  visible,  was  under  pressing  obligation  to  show 
that  Christ,  the  Head,  was  not  without  a  body,  for 
centuries  before  the  "  light  shone  from  Bethany." 
In  the  absence  of  information  on  this  point,  the  in- 
telligent reader  would  be  apt  to  conclude  that  the 
Reformer  had  misconceived  the  meaning  of  the  text 
in  the  epistle  to  the  Ejjhesians.  Wliere  loas  Christ's 
body  he/ore  the  light  shone  from  Bethany  ?  That 
was  the  question,  and  no  man  could  answer  it  bet- 
ter than  he  from  whom  that  light  emanated.  Let 
us  read  his  reply. — p.  72. 

"  There  is  another  argument  against  our  posi- 
tion, and  with  the  notice  of  it  we  shall  conclude  our 
present  article  in  review  of  'Campbellism  Examined,' 
by  Elder  Jeter.  '  Where  was  Christianity  before 
the  light  shone  from  Bethany  T  "  These  questions 
are,  by  means,  identical ;  but  Mr.  Campbell,  quo- 
ling,  I  presume,  from  memory,  unintentionally  sub- 
stituted   "  Christianity,"    which    could    always    be 


CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED.  91 

found  in  the  Scriptures,  for  the  "  body  of  Christ/' 
which,  according  to  his  definition  of  it,,  could  be 
found  nowhere.  But  let  us  hear  his  reply  to  this 
isolated  and  perverted  question,  which  he  terms  my 
"grand  argument"  against  hie  position.  Here  it 
follows — "  It  is  only  necessary  to  put  a  '  fool's  cap' 
on  any  head,  however  wise,  to  create  a  fool's  grin. 
So  Mr.  Jeter  might  ask  a  question  about  the  man 
in  the  moon,  which  no  astronomer,  star-gazer,  or 
moon-sazer,  could  at  all  answer  to  Mr.  Jeter's  sat- 
isfaction.  But  what  of  that  ?  If,  as  Solomon  has 
said,  '  that  which  is  wanting  cannot  be  numbered,' 
where  good  sense,  or  genius,  or  even  common  sense 
is  wanting,  there  is  no  one  can  give  it  or  create  it. 
There  are  not  a  few  things  in  science,  in  learning, 
and  in  religion,  which  Mr.  Jeter  will  not  under- 
stand until  he  get  another  head  or  heart."  I 
acknowledge  myself  fairly  confounded,  but  not  con- 
vinced. "I  will  lay  mine  hand  upon  my  mouth. 
Once  have  I  spoken  ;  but  I  will  not  answer :  yea, 
twice  ;  but  I  will  proceed  no  further." 

A  slight  mistake. — Mr.  Campbell  says,  p.  372, 
•'•Being  refuted  line  for  line  in  the  Religious  Herald, 
we  tender  to  Elder  Jeremiah  B.  Jeter  page  for  page 
with  us  in  the  Harbinger,  with  this  motto,  ^  He  that 
doeth  truth  comes  to  the  light,  that  his  deeds  may 
be  made  manifest  that  they  are  wrought  in  God.' " 
The  truth  is  that  the  Editor  of  the  Religious  Herald 
expressed  a  willingness  that  the  controversy  should 


92  CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED, 

be  published  in  his  paper,  and  that  fact  had  been 
printed  in  the  preceding  No.  of  the  Harbinger,  p. 
339  ;  but  having  chosen  my  method  of  bringing  my 
views  of  Mr.  Campbell's  system  before  the  public, 
I  did  not  deem  it  expedient  to  change  it,  for  his 
convenience. 

An  insinuation . — Speaking  of  my  book,  the  re- 
viewer says,  "  It  is,  indeed,  mechanically  viewed,  a 
merchantable  duodecimo  of  369  leaded  pica  pages  ; 
the  whole  of  which  we  could,  in  quite  a  legible  type, 
print  in  two  numbers  of  the  Harbinger.  But  it 
was  made  to  sell  for  one  dollar ;  and  being  endorsed 
by  anti-revisionist  Baptists,  will  have  quite  a  broad 
circulation.  But  this,  by  the  way,  only  proves  that 
there  is,  even  yet,  some  policy  in  ecclesiastic  war." 
— p.  549.  The* insinuation  seems  to  be  that  the 
book  was  i^ublished  from  a  mercenary  motive.  It 
comes,  however,  with  ill  grace  from  one  who  has 
spent  his  life  in  writing  books,  and  publishing  them 
under  the  protection  of  copy-rights.  It  is  a  pity 
that  Mr.  C.  should  have  resorted  to  such  an  insinua- 
tion for  the  support  of  his  cause  ;  but  necessity  has 
no  law,  and  taste  cannot  be  opposed  by  argument. 

My  reformation. — We  read  on  page  144  of  the 
review,  as  follows — "  But  has  not  Mr,  Jeter  him- 
self become  a  reformer,  in  the  fair  import  of  the 
term  V  It  is  a  great  reproach  to  me,  if  I  have 
made  no  progress  in  knowledge  and  piety,  within 
the  last  thirty  years  ;  but  I  certainly  have  not  be- 
come a  reformer  in  the  Bethanv  sense  of  the  term 


CAMPBELLI8M    BE-EXAMINED.  93 

— "  Does  he  now  baptize  upon  or  into  an  experi- 
ence ?" — I  have  already  confessed  my  ignorance  of 
what  Mr.  Campbell  means  by  baptizing  into  an  ea>- 
perience. — "  Does  he  require  every  candidate  to 
relate  his  Christian  experience  before  he  will  dis- 
pense to  him  the  ordinance  ?" — Certainly — I  either 
require  a  connected  relation  of  the  Christian  expe- 
rience of  the  applicant,  or  propound  to  him  such 
questions  as  will  elicit  the  best  evidence  the  case 
will  admit  of,  that  he  is  acquainted  with  the  funda- 
mental principles  of  the  Gospel,  and  is  a  true  peni- 
tent.— "Does  he  bring  him  before  the  Church,  and 
take  a  vote  upon  his  experience  before  he  baptizes 
him  ?" — By  all  mean8~"Does  he  immerse  him  into  a 
faith,  or  into  an  experience  ?" — Mr.  Campbell  mUst 
explain  his  terminology  before  I  can  answer. — I 
fear  by  this  time,  he  will  be  ready  to  conclude  that 
I  am  not  quite  so  much  reformed  as  he  had  hoped 
I  was,  and  to  repeat  the  inquiry,  printed  p.  550, 
"  Is  Dr.  Jeter  yet  standing  where  I  first  saw  him, 
at  the  Dover  Association,  in  1825,  gazing  at  some 
spasmodic  negroes,  displaying  experimental  religion 
by  muscular  twitches  and  embraces  !  Is  he  yet  an 
advocate  for  such  fearful  delusions  !"  I  proceed 
with  the  first  extract — "  Does  he  immerse  into  the 
name,  or  *  in  the  name  of  the  Father  ?'  &c." — This 
is  an  important  point,  in  speculation,  with  Mr,  C. 
He  dwells  on  it  frequently,  learnedly,  and  earnestly. 
In  the  use  of  the  formula  in  baptism,  I  am  not  re- 
formed.    His  criticism  on  this  subject  is  probably 


94  CAMPBELLISM    RE-EXAMINED. 

correct.  I  am  unwilling,  however,  to  change  \nj 
practice  on  ray  own  imperfect  knowledge  of  the 
Greek  ;  and  the  learned  have  not  yet  spoken  on  this 
point  with  such  distinctness  and  harmony  as  to  dis* 
sipate  all  my  doubts.  And  I  have  no  respect  for 
the  authority  of  a  critic  who  asserts,  as  Mr.  Camp- 
bell does,  that  regeneration,  conversion  and.  bap- 
tism, all  mean,  in  Scripture  usage,  the  same  act — 
that  active  participles,  in  Greek,  when  united  with  a 
command,  invariably  express  the  meaning  of  the 
command,  or  the  manner  of  obeying  it  ;  and  who 
supports  the  criticism  by  a  long  string  of  English 
sentences,  coined  by  himself  in  harmony  with  the 
rule — and  who  bases  an  important  doctrine  on  the 
distinction  between  "  begotten  of  God,"  and  "born 
of  God,"  though  both  phrases  represent  the  same 
terms  of  the  original  ;  and  persists  in  sending  forth 
these  stereotyped  criticisms,  without  correction  or 
retraction,  in  spite  of  unanswered  and  unanswerable 
refutations  of  them  spread  before  his  own  eyes,  and 
the  eyes  of  the  world.  And  especially  does  all  the 
learned  ado  about  substituting  "  into  the  name," 
for,  "  in  the  name,"  in  the  formula  of  Christian 
baptism,  seem  unimportant,  when  the  critic  himself, 
baptized,  as  I  doubt  not  he  was,  "  in  the  name," 
&c.  does  not  repeat  the  ordinance.  He  must,  fol- 
lowing the  example  of  his  quondam  co-adjutor.  Dr. 
Thomas,  be  re-immersed,  before  I  can  be  convinced 
that  even  he  attaches  any  serious  importance  to  his 
labored  criticisms  on  this  point.  ^ 


THE  LIBRARY 
UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 

Santa  Barbara 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW. 


Series  9482 


3  1205  00250  8131 


A     001  029  828     9 


